|
GORDON GREB |
 |
|
TO CHOOSE OUR LEADER?
|
What about a grass roots
citizens' electoral college?
By PROF. GORDON GREB
of TheColumnists.com
My good friend Mike is a conservative. We’ve argued a lot on nearly every subject, but on one thing we finally agree--the United States doesn’t tap the deep wellsprings of our entire 270 million population to find the best person with talent, ability and experience for the presidency.
Yes, I have a remedy, but before presenting it, please allow me a moment for a sigh of relief.
Whether you like it or
not, our chosen leader, George W. Bush, finally raised his hand
and took the oath of office on Jan. 20 to “preserve, protect
and defend the Constitution of the United States”--and for
the time being, the question of who will be
our next chief executive is over.
For now at least, we are finished with this over-advertised, under-debated and media-manipulated election process. But no sooner do they take down the bunting, pack up the chairs, and disassemble everything set up for the inauguration than it begins all over again. Since we, the people, have agonized over this election long enough, I can’t help asking, “Isn’t there a better way?”
This past week we saw George W. Bush gloried in the hoopla surrounding his second accession to the nation's highest office. But he probably never gave a moment's thought to why he was standing on this platform in Washington, D.C. at this particular time and place.
Now here is the multiple-choice
question a professor like myself delights in asking: How did
Mr. Bush become the candidate on the Republican ticket and get
elected to the White House? Choose from the following:
(a) voters casting their ballots in all 50 states, (b) voters
in the states of Iowa and New Hampshire, (c) lobbyists who gave
big bucks to this particular political candidate, (d) well paid
propagandists and skilled manipulators employed by special interests
to exploit our prejudices and biases on their behalf, (e) voting
machines in key states like Ohio and Florida, (f) all of the
above.
Answer: If your choice was “f” then you earned an “A” because all of them played a role, but why did I leave out the Electoral College (which some of you may not even have missed as an option)?
Everything we did the past four years was aimed at choosing representatives to the Electoral College. According to the U.S. Constitution, when we voted for George W. Bush, John Kerry, Ralph Nader, or anyone named on the ballot election day, we actually were choosing a “slate” of representatives--the Electors--charged with the responsibility of selecting our leader. We didn’t elect the president--they did it-- because we chose them to do it for us.
Why is this the constitutional way to do it? Because the framers wanted electors chosen from each state to assemble together and choose the best person they knew for the U.S. presidency. By allowing them to choose among the best people they knew and respected personally, they were more than likely to get the most qualified person to fill the office--like George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, or Aaron Burr, for example.
Representative democracy appeals to me so much that I've actually wanted to try it out in California, Oregon or Nevada. It had to be my own state or a neighboring state where I could campaign easily.
My campaign would tell
the voters, "Vote for the party that believes in a Grass
Roots Election Ballot. We stand for representation of the people
in government and our electors will be uncommitted when they
go to the Electoral College. They will
deliberate in deciding whom to vote for."
The GREB Party would invite voters in each congressional district to join, whereby their $1.00 membership would pay to employ a reputable polling organization to choose "elector" candidates from among them. Just as the Greeks did 2,500 years ago, you had a duty to serve if called upon and our members would produce the "electors" which would go to the college to deliberate.
My plan changes nothing
in law, certainly not in the Constitution, but simply carries
out what was originally intended. Most people don't know that
their vote for Bush, Kerry, or Nader was in reality for a list
of "unknown" people pledged to vote as a
bloc, presumably for their declared candidate. Of course they
do, having been carefully chosen by the candidates themselves.
Rarely has anyone broken away and decided to vote independently.
So what happened to the Electoral College as a deliberative,
representative body?
Years ago I almost tried
to do this. I wrote to the California Secretary of State to find
out how to qualify the GREB Party for the ballot in hopes of
carrying out my plan, but when the paperwork arrived I realized
it was too big a task for someone like
myself of limited means.
Too bad I couldn’t
move to a small state like Nevada--possessing only three electoral
votes--because in 2004 it was considered by both major parties
as a possible "swing state" in the final election.
Both Bush and Kerry were more likely to campaign in Nevada than
California, because the outcome was in doubt. But isn't that
the way we want it? More power to the "undecided voters"
these days--at least they are trying to THINK or DELIBERATE before
casting their votes.
Here's how my conservative friend Mike and I might debate my
plan:
MIKE: No, no, no! If these morons, with all the information available to them at their finger tips still haven't made up their minds, they should be disfranchised for two terms. Maybe that will make them pay attention.
GORDON: I'd love to have
those three Nevada electors in the GREB party and allow them
freely to cast their votes FOR ANYBODY THEY WANTED TO. Maybe
that would be the start of something big--a return to thoughtful,
serious and sane representative democracy--not the mobocracy
created today by TV, movies, and
advertising.
MIKE: Sure but being a Canadian living in Victoria, B.C., my agreement is tentative and truthfully uniformed. I have read your constitution but I am by no means familiar enough with it to argue either side of the argument, nor am I very knowledgeable about the history of the electoral college. But it seems to me that things started to go wrong about the time the senate became elected by popular vote. And having said that then I must add that that is another argument I am unqualified to make.
GORDON: By admitting you need more information I think that means you favor exchanging information with colleagues and taking time to deliberate. That’s what gave us our free democratic republic in the 13 colonies in the first place. It came from the deliberation of our “founding fathers” who created our U.S. Constitution, including the idea that the president should be chosen by representatives elected by the people. It has worked awkwardly and well for more than 200 years but now some want to change it.
Can we continue to use the current electoral system as written? Or should we amend it to try something else? Everything we saw and heard on Jan. 20--the crowds, parades, speeches, and celebrations--was originally supposed to happen in March but that was changed by Amendment XX 70 years ago. That change took place on Jan. 20, 1937, the second inaugural of Franklin D. Roosevelt.
As history’s only four-term president he stood for the “Forgotten Man” which reminds me, Sunday, Jan. 30, is Roosevelt’s birthday. He's almost become our Forgotten President. Seventy years ago we observed Roosevelt’s birthday as March of Dimes Day. Today the inaugural of George Bush was observed by some as “Don’t spend a dime day.”
Should I start organizing
for a Grass Roots Election Ballot in 2008? It’s up to you.
Getting the idea into circulation is a first step. But that makes
it part of the deliberate process, doesn’t it?
©2005
by Gordon Greb. The drawing is from IMSI's Master Clips Collection, 1895 Francisco Blvd.
E., San Rafael, CA, 94901-5506, USA. This column first posted
on Jan. 24, 2005.
You
can comment on this column online. Please address your message
to either "The Editors" or Gordon Greb. To send an
email, click here: talkback@thecolumnists.com
|
|
|
Archives |
|
|