How would you fix elections?

#51
#51
#52
#52
NorthDallas40 said:
Fair enough. However in this case you’re advocating for the Feds to interject their business in state’s issues. All that is required is allocation of elector amounts. How the states bind those electors is their business and the constitution is quiet on that matter and that’s not an accident. States rights is another sticking point after all.
Click to expand...
No the constitution spells out that the states get to appoint how they want. Not bind them.
 
#53
#53
LouderVol said:
No the constitution spells out that the states get to appoint how they want. Not bind them.
Click to expand...
Correct. The constitution states how many electors the states get. It is otherwise completely quiet on oversight of those electors. All that the twelfth Amendment proscribes is how their votes shall be counted. But it does not release them from the state laws defining their appointment.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.[a]

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.[/quote]
Click to expand...
 
#54
#54
And prior to the update by the 12th Amendment you have article II clause 2 of the constitution where the executive branch is defined which clearly states the method of choosing the electors is specifically left to the choosing of each state. It is clear that the electors represent the state and the states interests as their method of choosing is totally deferred to each states own legislature.

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Click to expand...
 
#56
#56
LouderVol said:
Once you start choosing who can vote and not you have created a class system. No thank you. It just adds another layer of self serving while ignoring even more of the country.

And then once the government has the ability to choose who can vote you will have the two extremes lopping off groups they dont like.
Click to expand...

Choosing? Who’s choosing? In my opinion only those vested in the country get to vote an to be vested you earn your citizenship.
 
#57
#57
hog88 said:
Choosing? Who’s choosing? In my opinion only those vested in the country get to vote an to be vested you earn your citizenship.
Click to expand...
What does vested mean? It's just some means test. Once you establish you have to pay taxes its next that you have to be a net tax payer and then tax over a certain level, then another.

Pur country was founded at a time where 1/3 supported staying with England, and 1/3 didnt care at all. And then there was a massive immigrant population moving thru. There is no reason to believe there should be some type of investment to be a citizen.

Not everyone can serve and pay. And that's ok. And we shouldnt establish any type of hierarchy based on that.
 
#58
#58


found this video which discusses some of the problems with voting, while also ending on a possible better option.

approval voting or rated approval voting. different than ranked voting.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top