{"id":1060,"date":"2017-01-10T20:38:11","date_gmt":"2017-01-11T00:38:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/?p=1060"},"modified":"2017-01-11T23:34:09","modified_gmt":"2017-01-12T03:34:09","slug":"sifting-through-the-ashes-part-2-a-instead-of-the-electoral-college-what","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/blog\/2017\/01\/10\/sifting-through-the-ashes-part-2-a-instead-of-the-electoral-college-what\/","title":{"rendered":"Sifting Through the Ashes, Part 2-A, Instead of the Electoral College, what?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Greetings and Salutations;<\/p>\n

I have offered some\u00a0 opinions about the Electoral College, how it is supposed to work, and how it actually worked in the 2016 Election back at this Post<\/a>.\u00a0 However,\u00a0 there is still more to be said, in my opinion,\u00a0 so I thought I would wrestle with it again.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
The issue of the Electoral College and its workings and, \u00a0how to change it to represent reality a bit better is continuing to be a topic of discussion. \u00a0There are some hints that for the first time in decades, \u00a0it may undergo some serious reworking soon. \u00a0 I have to say, \u00a0I rather hope so!<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
What, I asked myself,\u00a0 are our options?\u00a0 On this week”s issue of “Your Weekly Constitutiona<\/a>l” Stewart Harris talks with David O. Stewart (who is a Constitutional Lawyer and has some insightful views to offer)\u00a0 at length about these issues. \u00a0I strongly recommend taking the time to listen to their Presentation. \u00a0 Now, \u00a0among other things, \u00a0he suggests a change to the laws that would adjust the Electoral College so that instead of a “Winner Take All” law for the candidate winning the state, \u00a0the candidate winning the majority of the popular vote would get that state’s entire number of electoral votes. \u00a0 I have to say that, \u00a0while this is interesting, and, perhaps wise from a legal point of view, \u00a0 I am not entirely satisfied with it. \u00a0It does not address the issue I have commented on before about how I do not care for the whole idea of “Winner Take All”. \u00a0In any case, \u00a0he has interesting views. \u00a0I suggest a visit to\u00a0his website – http:\/\/davidostewart.com\/\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0to see what else is in the discussion.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n<\/div>\n
Now, \u00a0on to MY thoughts. \u00a0 First off, \u00a0I have, in the first post on the Electoral College, \u00a0presented my objections to the “Winner Take All” laws, \u00a0and suggested that the Electoral votes be applied to the candidates \u00a0in proportion to the actual vote in the state. \u00a0 This will, among other things, \u00a0ensure that a candidate, who squeaks through to a win with a dozen or fewer votes \u00a0will not overly benefit from their victory.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0If, for example, \u00a0there are 5 Electoral Votes from a state, \u00a0and three candidates took \u00a01%, 49% \u00a0and 50% of the total votes, \u00a0 the five votes would be split, as evenly as possible among them. \u00a0I would see that the 1% candidate would be out…as one cannot have 1\/2 a vote! \u00a0 It would then, mean that the remaining two candidates would get (respectively) \u00a02 and 3 Electoral Votes. \u00a0It is as fair as I can see it can be,\u00a0 since we are working with integers here!<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Also, there is a HUGE difference between a 1 vote advantage and a 3 vote advantage that would be given with a “Winner Take All” law. \u00a0Between that, \u00a0and removing the “Faithless Voter” laws that punish the Electoral voter from changing their vote, \u00a0 the results of the College \u00a0would better represent the desires of the people.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
There is, of course,\u00a0 another option….<\/div>\n
We could move to a more Parliamentary format of Election for the Congress. \u00a0 Each state would have a list of (hopefully) several candidates,\u00a0 representing differing parties and differing view on the ballot.\u00a0 They would, then, vote for candidates, \u00a0and the top folks would get the nod. \u00a0This would certainly ensure that the Congress would more closely represent the demographics of the country, \u00a0but, \u00a0it would likely provide a voice for smaller candidates and parties too. \u00a0 As an example: \u00a0Say a state can elect 10 Representatives. \u00a0 In the elections, \u00a0 the breakdown of votes is (by party)\u00a0 #1:5%. #2:29%, #3:31%, and #4:35%.\u00a0 This\u00a0 means that the Representatives would be apportioned out this way – #1 gets\u00a0 1 Representative.\u00a0 Each of the remaining 3 parties (the top three)\u00a0 get 3 Representatives\u00a0 each.\u00a0 \u00a0 Again, \u00a0this is integer math, \u00a0so, \u00a0if a party got a small enough number of votes,\u00a0 they would not have a seat, and for several parties that were close enough together in their percentages of the vote,\u00a0 they would get the same number of seats.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
I realize that this, \u00a0second method, \u00a0would really change the face of Congress.\u00a0 as we would be likely to see more parties represented in the House (at least), but it could extend to the Senate.\u00a0\u00a0 One positive aspect of this change is that\u00a0 it would really change the face of Government, but, without lighting wildfires that destroy the entire structure and surrounding areas. \u00a0 As for Electors…I would use the SAME rules for the states to appoint Electors to the College. \u00a0 \u00a0Now, \u00a0this might cause more Presidential elections to go to the House for Resolution, \u00a0but, \u00a0that would have happened in this one, \u00a0if the recounts and challenges to Electors been allowed to play out.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
God Help Us All<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Bee Man Dave<\/div>\n

=-=-=-=-=
\nPowered by Blogilo<\/a><\/b><\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Greetings and Salutations; I have offered some\u00a0 opinions about the Electoral College, how it is supposed to work, and how… Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_crdt_document":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[22,386,23,12,13,17,18],"tags":[578,260],"class_list":["post-1060","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ethics","category-general-thoughts","category-political-rants","category-politics-2","category-questionable-decisions","category-snake-oil","category-something-good-this-way-comes","tag-electoral-college","tag-parliament"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1060","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1060"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1060\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1076,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1060\/revisions\/1076"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1060"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1060"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beemandave.com\/beemanblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}