ELECTORS WANTED 2 - Electors vs MPV

ELECTORS VS MPV

Introduction

Governor Malloy has proposed that the 7 Connecticut presidential electors be forced to vote for the candidate with the Most Popular Votes. That proposal is in direct conflict with the Constitution, as explained in the first posting on this blog (The Electoral Task – Introduction).

His proposal, however, is not rejected by most people in all states regardless of political philosophy. The argument in favor of MPV selection rests on the mistaken belief that, in a democracy, the majority rules. In other words the Founding Fathers had it wrong.

This posting asks the readers to consider the possibility that the electoral system as dictated in the Constitution is preferable to MPV when it comes to selecting a president. In fact, Democracy is not based on serving the whims of the Majority. Rather its base is the sum of the value in each of us acting individually. The electoral system dictated by the Founding Fathers relied on the trust that the majority and minority can afford a group of individuals who are charged with the duty to select a national leader.

Much of the information presented here has been copied from in my web site ElectorsWanted.com

The problems with MVP president selection

The way we elect our president today is by popular vote. Occasionally today's convoluted method of selecting electors backfires and the MVP is overridden, ever so slightly, by the electoral college. In either case, our choices today are limited to one of two party candidates.

Of course we need to narrow the candidate field somehow. The average person would not have the time nor training nor inclination to screen a thousand resumes and pick the best of the lot. So we let the parties do it. Each party naturally picks someone who has come up through the ranks of the party. That is to say, we most often have two "politicians" from which to choose.

The first problem, then, is that each president begins his term with a huge percentage of the opposite party against him. Having a president from one party allies the president with that party in the legislature. The two branches become very closely associated. The association is in conflict with the intent of having 3 branches. The President then picks judges from his party. He thus adds members of the third branch to the common bed.

With the above explanation, a partial list of the problems with MVP is shown below.

              1. It alienates the minority.

              2. It divides the country by party.

              3. It gives too much power to parties.

              4. It makes a mockery of Article II of the constitution.

              5. It discourages the separation of power.

              6. It politicizes the appointment of judges.

              7. It limits the choices for president.

              8. It limits the evaluation of candidates for president.

              9. It adversely influences the way States select their governors. 

            10. It offers no impetus for the exceptional to train for president.

The benefits of elector president selection

Empowering electors offers the following advantage over the Majority Rule. 

              1. Removes Executive branch blind allegiance to party

              2. Removes Legislative branch blind allegiance to the president 

              3. Ends Judge selection based on party philosophy

              4. Allows A path to the presidency by any American

              5. Allows A training path for great civil leaders

              6. Opens The possibility that Governors may one day follow suit