Hillary thinks it’s as easy as…?
Sorry for two intrusions on one day but I couldn’t let this one go by without a comment.
I received an email earlier today: Abolish the Electoral College via End Citizens United. Below is the message in its entirety.
Needless to say, signing the petition gives the signer the “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to donate money to…wait, which one is this one…oh, yeah, Citizen’s United. But that’s not the real reason I’m writing.
If you actually read the message you’d see that to “prove to Congress that the American people want to get rid of the Electoral College” and for “Congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment” requires 10,000 signatures.
At 8:06am EDT, according to the email, they still needed 9,219 signatures. That means at that point, 781 people signed and they’d reached less than 8% of their goal!
Do you wonder why this campaign has not captured the attention and imagination of the the American people? If you think it’s because Hillary Clinton is the person they chose to spearhead this initiative, you’re only partially correct. The real reason is that it’s a FOOL’S ERRAND! What do I mean? Here’s what it will take to abolish the Electoral College:
According to former (Bill) Clinton secretary of labor Robert Reich it’s not going to happen because, Amending the constitution is very hard – requiring a two-thirds vote by the House and Senate plus approval by three-fourths of state Legislatures.
In fact the last time it was attempted was in 1966, led by Sen. Birch Bayh, an Indiana Democrat (yes, some of us are old enough to remember that there were Democratic senators from Indiana) who introduced an amendment calling for the direct election of the president by popular vote. At the time nearly half the Senate signed on as formal sponsors of Bayh’s bill and it passed the House by an overwhelming margin of 339 to 70, with votes in favor drawn nearly equally from Democrats and Republicans alike. As the proposal headed to the Senate, President Nixon announced his support as well. Apparently, in a place far away and long ago there was this thing called “bipartisanship.”
However, according to Kevin M. Kruse, a professor of history at Princeton,
But like many changes, the constitutional amendment was throttled in the Senate. Republican Strom Thurmond of South Carolina led a bipartisan coalition of southern conservatives against the measure. Convinced that the system’s inequalities were necessary to preserve their power, they vowed to defend it at all costs, with repeated procedural delays and filibusters. Ultimately, they kept the Senate from voting on the amendment and thus kept the Electoral College in place.
Reich believes that we can make the Electoral College irrelevant without a constitutional amendment. Here’s how:
Article 2 of the Constitution says states can award their electors any way they want. So, instead of allocating electors on a “winner-take-all” basis as all but two states do now, states can allocate them based on the proportion of popular votes each candidate receives. As Reich writes,
So all that’s needed is for states with a total of at least 270 electors to agree to award all their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote.
Of course, Reich’s “all that’s needed” is not an easy hurdle. Do you really think Texas and other Red states will go for it? If you do, there’s a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you. And if Blue states begin the process of proportional allocation without all the states going along, guess what…things get worse as only a portion, for example, of California’s or New York’s votes will go to the Democratic candidate. The only way this will work is if every state buys into it.
Sorry Mr. Reich, that’s as likely to happen as Hillary Clinton’s Constitutional amendment.
Speaking of Mrs. Clinton, I received a second email from her today. This one has her shilling for the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee under the guise of doing something about SCOTUS’ shameful Roe v Wade decision. Opening bid, only $7. Her pitch, In Congress, we’re limited by slim majorities. By building our Democratic power in state legislatures, we can pave the way for more states to secure abortion rights and protect our right to bodily autonomy. I guess she’s been away from the “game” so long that she wasn’t aware that gerrymandering has made it virtually impossible to “build our Democratic power in state legislatures”…even in states where Democratic officials hold all or most of the statewide offices. The battleground states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are prime examples. I actually wrote about this issue a year ago in a post I called, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!” https://around-the-block.com/2021/05/10/im-mad-as-hell-and-im-not-going-to-take-this-anymore/
Let me close with what I’m sure will not go down well with my “friends of HRC” readers. Do we really need to have Hillary Clinton help fix things? Isn’t one reason we have endured the last six years of hell due, in part, to the her arrogance and the ineptitude of both the candidate, her husband and her staff? In an Around the Block election post-mortem I posted on 11/16/16, I wrote, among other things,
Despite her incredible credentials and unmatched qualifications, Clinton family hubris and Hillary’s many unforced errors were too much to overcome. Here’s a link to that post (in Around the Block’s former guise):
Can’t the Democratic Party find someone else to rally us. Channelling Ferris Bueller’s teacher, played by (the very right-wing) Ben Stein: “Anyone? Anyone?”