MUTALK Archives

September 1995

MUTALK@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Miami University conversation <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 22 Sep 1995 10:59:46 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (89 lines)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 
Hello, my name is Erik Evenson.
On the question of voting I have a few remarks.
 
        First of all, the government of this great country
is a republic not a democracy.  The President of the United
States is not elected by the people directly but by the
electoral college.  In fact, the presidential candidate who
has the greater fraction of the popular vote can lose to
the second most popular under our current system of
government.  The requirement is that the president-elect
must have over fifty percent of the total cast electoral
votes, in which each state has a number equal to its total
number of representatives and senators.  Not only can there
exist a significant difference between the percentage of
the national popular vote and the electoral vote, but there
is a trap door within the Constitution to bypass the entire
weight of the popular and electoral vote.  If three
candidates run for the Presidential seat AND no one
candidate receives at least one vote over fifty percent of
the electoral vote (which may happen in the election next
year) the newly elected House of Representatives cast votes
and elect the next President.
        Imagine the following scenario:  the incumbent
President Clinton gets 52% of the popular and 48% of the
electoral vote.  Dole gets 35% of the popular vote and 37%
of the electoral vote.  Finally, Powell gets 13% of the
popular vote and 15% of the electoral vote.  The absence of
a clear majority (greater than 50%) forces the vote to the
Republican-dominated House of Representatives.  Guess who
wins?  Although Dole lost in the popular vote and the
electoral vote he moves into the White House for the next
four years.
 
        Is it in the best interest of the current voter to
encourage other citizens less politically aware to vote?
Actually, the value of active voter's vote deceases in
value with each additional person voting in his district.
Our society consists of a wide range of people with
different abilities and interests.  It only seems natural
that the self-motivated, politically active individuals
should vote.  Why share your voting power with
disinterested persons?  If they don't vote, it's more power
to you!  Seize it!!  I personally think that the act of
voting and the capitalistic free market are united under
the same principle.  Consumers participate in the market to
seek remedies to their nagging wants and desires; whereas,
people vote to suggest remedies to rectify society's
problems in a way in which they deem fit.
        Forcing or encouraging people to vote, against
their will, and with their ignorance, causes the votes of
knowledgeable and active participators in the political
process to depreciate in value in what may be a crucial
election.  Those people who feel qualified to vote will
find time and effort to seek out their voter registration
office in their district.  So considering the previous
insight, the current voter registration services at license
bureaus, libraries, and other public places of mass
congregations, across this country may be a bad idea, that
is, if the quality of the voter, in terms of wisdom,
knowledge, and motivation, is the goal of a well-tuned
Republic.  The only alternative is a mobocracy.
 
Also, I would like to point out that not all Americans are
equally represented in the Senate.  After the right of
senator appointment was wrestled from the states and given
to the people, a serious unbalance was created in the power
of each individual's vote to elect their senator.  Does the
weight of an individual's vote for senator in California
equal the weight of an Alaskian's vote, who is also a
natural-born American (Presidential prerequisite), for his
representative senator?  Is it fair that one American's
power of senatorial vote is unequal to that of another?
Are Americans being discriminated against by the U.S.
government solely due to the state in which they were born
or wish to reside?
 
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
 
iQCVAwUBMGB3vwFsBM2cXgcZAQHpGgP/eRdtQAtGTXSztmIe+beNo+cwsq4HOGzB
LHzkgBEdFq2onFvXKak4gJFx9Efu57RZ4INw2DkQMmFUX3WmUGAIszIOYb/zsoWL
W43ta6w1WhkzCnw/rmzSPxHAumOlnjY40GjPeeVI7rMS5OP7diVPDpfSMnZumd7C
KW4yl63AvPU=
=3P3/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

ATOM RSS1 RSS2