Resolving the Crisis over
Determining the Winning Candidate
for the Presidency.
I. ACTION:
It is recommended that a Special Session of the Florida
Legislature be called to meet at the beginning of December, 2000, for the
purpose of passing a law 1) assigning the political parties' candidates for the
Electoral College to the candidates for the Presidency in proportion to the
number of citizens voting for each, to the nearest whole number, 2) directing
said chosen Electors to cast their ballots for their assigned
candidate.
And furthermore and at the same time to urge other State
legislatures to be convoked promptly for the same purpose.
And furthermore and at the same time and in such legislative
sessions as may result, to urge the other States to put to a vote a resolution
to amend the Constitution of the United States to abolish the Electoral College
and make the election of the President go to the person who has commanded a
popular majority in the election.
II. PREDICTABLE IMMEDIATE RESULT OF THE FLORIDA ACTION:
13 of the Florida to the Electoral College will vote for either
George Bush or Al Gore, depending upon which of the two men has a plurality of
votes as of the closing and counting of ballots on the deadline date for the
receipt of valid absentee ballots, and the remaining 12 Electors will vote for
the other man. Depending upon the results of other possible vote recounts in
other States, the election may go to either man.
III. RESULT IF ACTION IS FOLLOWED BY OTHER
STATES:
An avalanching effect may occur. For those States, whose
popular vote, accredited in the Florida manner, will benefit a candidate
supported by the State legislature's majority, may well enact similar laws,
until all States will find it both politically expedient and popularly required
to do the same. In the end, the Electoral College will be largely accountable to
a popular vote, except that the smaller States will still obtain an advantage,
because the Electoral College will still exist as set up in the Constitution,
and therefore will be biased in favor of the States with small populations. The
State legislatures, however, can help the general situation, if they provide for
a balloting system that forces a majority. They must leave no opportunity for a
third or additional candidates to cut the vote of the winner, which would in
fact give a virtual vote in the Electoral College to third party voters (see IV,
13, below).
IV. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE NEW LAW:
1.
The Governor, Legislature and responsible elective officers
of the State of Florida recognize that the indeterminancy of the election
results in Florida is in itself causing the delay, possibly to great national
disadvantage, of the Presidential election and is rendering indeterminate the
identity of the next President because of the closeness of the Electoral College
Vote throughout the nation.
2.
In constitutional law, the State legislatures have in their
hands, and for a long time have had in their hands, the power to adjust the
Electoral College quota, that has been calculated for their State, to the
popular will (aside from the above-mentioned advantage given least populous
States).
3.
Throughout the history of the nation, the Electoral College
has been unpopular because it manifestly has played into the hands of the
politicians in control of State legislatures. These have generally tried to
maximize their influence in the election of and with the incoming President by
giving him all, instead of his proportionate share, of the State's Electors.
4.
The Electoral College has not only been unpopular but has
also been difficult for the average citizen and voter to comprehend.
One result has been that almost all of the few defenders of the
Electoral College have stood to benefit directly by its workings.
But they have been strategically placed to protect the
Electoral College.
5.
There have been several near crises when either the winner
in the Electoral College has not possessed a popular plurality, not to speak of
a majority, or a dangerous controversy has erupted, or an election has been
thrown unreasonably into the hands of the
majority faction of the House of Representatives. The Electoral
College played a part in the shameful corrupt bargain that followed the
Electoral College fiasco of the 1876 election, the results of which contributed
to a century of repression of the black people of America and the degradation of
the South.
6.
The inequitable nature of the College has tended to favor
large interests in the smaller States and to benefit unprogressive interests in
some rural States, or, conversely, to encourage extreme movements of the right
and left in these States. Contrary to those who say the system brings stability,
the system brings instability. To a handful of politicians and rich interests,
who usually dominate these smaller States, this unstable system does reliably
bring larger benefits. Many voices lament rightly the undue influence of special
interests in the United States, but the
favoritism given the special interests of the less populous
States as such is both real and structurally implanted.
7.
The inequitable nature of the Electoral College, together
with other structures of government, has given some heavily rural areas and
several small States an undeserved and unwarranted advantage over the large
cities. They are given a voting power per capita several times that of urban
folk. The Electoral College, at considerable cost, brings a small and
unasked-for increment of power to a few millions to the detriment of some 250
million Americans.
8.
In some States, Electoral College candidates, rendered so
insignificant by the system, are not even named on the ballot, which lends a
bizarre atmosphere to the process of electing the President. Their personal
traits and background, even when named, mean nothing to the vast majority of
citizens.
9.
The Electoral College, as is flagrantly displayed in the
present crisis, inspires a distaste for the American way of government around
the world. It is impossible to justify in political debate, and provides solace
to those engaged in the business of suppressing democracy. Short of abolishing
the College, the reduction of the status of the Electors to messengers of the
popular will such as is expressed in popular elections would stifle practically
all criticisms of the institution.
10.
Granted that the elimination of the College is preferable
to its maintenance, the political difficulties of providing a constitutional
amendment to do so are enormous, and therefore an alternative solution to the
immediate problem is required. The action required of the Governor of Florida,
who is the brother of candidate George Bush, in convoking the Legislature into
special session, being voluntary, would be widely regarded as a noble and rare
civic deed, for which he would be forever honored.
11.
A danger of extensive demonstrations, rioting and public
disorder is present now and may increase as the controversy over the November 7,
2000 election results continues to deadlock the government and prevent a clear
and proper choice of a candidate who is perceived to have truly and fairly won
the election. Such unrest can easily spread and impinge upon ever deeper issues
and chasms of public consensus. The media can be expected to enhance this
collective process. The high rate of participation in the election may have
indicated not only an unanticipated general interest of the public, but also, as
has happened in democracies in times past, a general displeasure that could
cross the threshold of normal expressions of opinion via the ballot into more
extreme crowd behavior. That is, the rate of participation in voting is like the
fever gauge on a thermometer.
12.
Unless a progressive step forward is taken, preferably a
leap forward, the next President will encounter formidable obstacles to his
carrying on the government and guiding legislation, because of adamant massive
opposition in Congress and among politicians, and because of a large mistrust
and hostility generated among the public.
13.
The proposed action of the Florida legislature would
nullify the Third Party effect that has brought about the harmful present
situation. Ralph Nader achieved a sufficient vote to deny the election to Al
Gore. One study concludes that two-thirds of the Nader vote would have gone to
Gore. So the advantage claimed for the Electoral College, that it would
discourage minor parties, is also a disadvantage of the College; the tactics of
minor parties are changed, and the same effect comes about in a different way.
What is needed is a system, such as the Brams approval-voting system. There the
voter votes for all candidates that he or she considers acceptable. All
approvals are counted. The candidate who wins the most approvals wins the
election. In the Florida case, such a ballot would have produced a majority for
Gore. This is the system most closely applicable to the reform mentioned in
Section III above.
14.
The Electoral College is supported as "conservative," a
term that is as abused as the term "egalitarian" or "democratic" or "elitist."
It is a conservatism that is either self-serving, or short-sighted and
uninventive.
15.
While the action proposed to the Florida government will in
itself possibly enable an acceptable and enduring solution enduring over the
next four years and even longer, the extended action involving the full
complement of States sufficient to propose to the people that they approve a
constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College is by no means too
difficult. The machinery of government under the Constitution, although
generally cumbersome, can generate great speed when deemed necessary, as
happened in the repealing of the Eighteenth (Prohibition) Amendment in the
middle of the Great Depression and soon after the presidential election of 1932.
It is also possible that the Florida action, no matter whether the ultimate
winner be George Bush or Al Gore, will generate the momentum to bring about the
drastic reform or abolition of the Electoral College within the next two or
three years.
16.
Whatever happens now in Florida, the Electoral College, and
the Presidency, the government of the United States requires a thoroughgoing
restudy, redesigning and restructuring, such as was the real intent of Alexander
Hamilton, James Madison, and others who gathered to amend the Articles of
Confederation and who, uninvited to do so, framed the present Constitution. The
new technological, industrial, and organizational revolution is nationalizing
the country and globalizing the world. If the United States government is
unequipped to lead this global transformation, which clutches alike and easily
the most remote oil pipeline worker in the State of Alaska and the operator of a
computer café in Tampa, Florida, while abroad it makes the Palestinians and the
Timor Islanders constituents in fact of the Presidency and Congress, then much
of America's directing influence will pass into other hands and/or the world
will slump into a general misery that will not pass over America.
Alfred de Grazia
< mailto:<aldegrazia@hotmail.com,
> Angouleme, France,
14 Nov. 2000