I: What Has Happened to My Country

Due to a steady bombardment of the tenets of the Constitution, judicial principles, and education in America over the last hundred plus years by progressive socialists, we are on the precipice of losing the greatest form of governance ever created.  Governance built on man’s rights emanating from the almighty, supporting free markets, and the opportunity for anyone to succeed.  Our country has been divided and forces from the White House down continue to spread class derision so they can further split and then break this country.

In the late eighteenth century, a republic, made up of three equal federal branches and independent sovereign states was formed by what had to be divinely guided men.  These sovereign states, if taken as a whole, were eminently equal to if not superior to the federal branches, and this new federal government was clearly understood to exist for the purpose of serving the union of states and the people.

This totally new form of government was delicately built to be horizontal and vertical.  The vertical was the balance between the central government and the states, while the horizontal was the balance brought about by the separation of powers of three distinct branches, resulting in the well-known “checks and balances”.  The Constitution for the United States of America, when it was written, may have been a gift from the almighty, for without divine guidance – not my sentiments alone as these sentiments were shared by George Washington and other founders – man could not have created such an incredibly noble and profound document for humanity.

This was a document based on the supremacy of humanity over government.

In an effort to insure that government is always subservient to the people, the founders built in controls to limit a federal government to only meeting the minimum needs of the states and the people as a collective of sovereign nations.  Some of the founders believed that the new constitution would ward off government intrusion into man’s freedom as it stood. James Madison, the architect of the constitution, did not believe that a “bill of rights” was needed, because he felt the document to be strong enough to keep the federal government under control by the states and the people.  He wrote in Federalist # 51– The Federalist Papers:

“Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.”

Yet, other influential founders and the people of several states and state legislatures in the whole demanded even more protection from a central government, thus the Bill of Rights, and especially the ninth and tenth amendments in the Bill of Rights;
Tenth amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States [the Congress and thus the federal government] by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Unfortunately, that original federal government, functioning at the behest of member sovereign states, is no more.  Remember, the states created the federal government to make the union of the states stronger, but not to degrade the collective power of the states.  Today, the federal government is an overarching colossus, supremely powerful, threatening to make the states irrelevant and to seize control of our individual liberty.

What happened?  Has there been a coup d’état; a civil war; or a forced overthrow of the Republic?  No, we just allowed the constitution, the judiciary, and the education system to be hijacked.

III: Why the Electoral College

One important, unusual, and often challenged pillar of our republic is the system of presidential electors, commonly called the Electoral College. Today, too large a body of our population is unaware how its government is supposed to function. An example is the Electoral System. The “electoral college” is simply a key function of a republic and not a national centralized government with full democratic elections. This is because the union of states created a federal, but not national, government with a republican form of governance wherein they reserved the choice of chief executive to the populace on a state by state basis.

In this form, the voters of each state select their presidential electors. The power of the states was and is maintained where each state has say to the extent that its population affords them the equivalent number of electors to the total of congressman and senators from that state. These electors on behalf of the voters of the individual states cast their ballots for president. This is one way the republic works to prevent the smaller states from being overrun by the larger states. It manages the situation where multiple candidates are running and no majority of the popular vote is achieved for any one candidate. It also insures representation equality to each member state, on a sovereign state level, for the selection of the president.

What would happen if we elected the president based solely on the national popular vote? Many progressives are pushing for this change and want to eliminate the Electoral College. Incredulously, at either the behest of or consent of their constituents, some progressive ideology controlled state legislatures have been contemplating or passed legislation to require the electors of the electoral college from their state to vote for the President of the United States solely based on the national popular vote, thus negating a key purpose of the electoral college.

If a state voted 60% for candidate “A”, but the national popular vote was 51% for candidate “B”, then the electors would be bound to ignore their state’s voters and vote for candidate “B”. This is just another attempt to place states and the people of these states into a second tier status with the federal government and to further destroy the Constitution’s delicate vertical balance between the central government and the states.

For more detail on the “Electoral College” visit the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration website –

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html.

Remember, we were founded as a federal republic and not a national government. This was done to insure a union of or confederation of states, rather than to make a national government. We have local representatives in Congress, we had our state governments represented in the Senate until we frittered that away with the seventeenth amendment (more on this later), we combine our representation in Congress with the authority of individual states to amend our Constitution, and we as states, not a national government, elect a president. Our states’ electors are supposed to elect a president under the guidance of the will of the citizens of their respective states, and not the will of citizens of other states. Our states, no matter how small, have a say. In The Federalist, popularly known as “The Federalist Papers” – in Federalist 39, James Madison, the principal architect of our Constitution, wrote

“…if the government be national with regard to the operation of its powers, it changes its aspect again when we contemplate it in relation to the extent of its powers. The idea of a national government involves in it not only an authority over individual citizens, but an indefinite supremacy over all persons and things, so far as they are objects of lawful government.”

In a federal republic an electoral college serves a real purpose. Here is a case where those who wish to disband the college having insufficient knowledge of how their government was established and why it was established the way it was. Or they are progressives who wish to utilize the large progressive populations in a few east and west coast states to govern as progressives do – we become subjects and they believe they are the elite learned few who know better allowing little or no individual freedom.

Civics is an outdated subject in our schools because progressive have infiltrated our entire education process, thus our citizenry has been persuaded to give up a key tenet of our republic found in our Constitution, presidential Electors. This is one more instance where we simply want to abandon another tenet of the finest free market and individual liberty governance in the history of mankind.

The use of the presidential Elector system has resulted in a candidate getting either the majority of votes or the plurality of votes and not becoming president. This is not bad. By requiring the presidential winner to gain the affirmation of the Electors, we preserve the role of the states and the people of the individual states in this federal republic. From time to time key states formerly safe for one party switch due to economic or cultural changes.