Case building against broken primary system

votingMaybe, if nothing else, the Democratic debacle over the Michigan and Florida primaries will stoke the fire to reform the whole way the nation picks presidents. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., called last week for six rotating regional presidential primaries, a system that Kansas Secretary of State Ron Thornburgh and his colleagues have long advocated. Nelson also wants to abolish the Electoral College, disallow electronic voting machines that lack a paper trail, and establish early voting nationwide. “As to our right to vote, and have that vote count, there can be no debate,” Nelson said in a speech to the Florida Senate. “The goal is simple: One person, one vote.”

34 Comments

  1. writerdog
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    What went wrong in Florida and Michigan is not about the voting system. It is about violating the established rules. If the vote in either state is discounted it was because of that violation. It was those in the party in these states that made those decisions and not the system as a whole. If someone decides to rob the bank, it is not the “rules” fault for them going to prison.

  2. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    It’s not the primaries that are broken, it’s the general election. We’re _supposed_ to choose electors on Nov 4, and the _ELECTORS_ are supposed to choose the President on Dec 15. But because some egotistical b–d from Pennsylvania whined about Samuel Miles in 1796 (”I choose him to act, not to think.”) the Electoral College has been emasculated for over 200 years.

    LISTEN, FOOLS! We’re talking about the “Leader of the Free World” here. We need the best PERSON to be President. We need the best person for the COUNTRY, not the stinking PARTIES.

    Would you choose a corporate CEO by a vote of all the employees? Of course not! You’d solicit resumes, you’d appoint a search committee, you’d let the search committee _interview_ the candidates, and you’d have the committee recommend the best candidate (or candidates) to the corporate board of directors. Well, children, That Is How The Electoral College Is Supposed To Work.

  3. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    The problem is not limited to Florida and Michigan. The entire democratic party process needs to be revisited. They did it to themselves. Republicans had no major problems. No one “stole” the election for you this time but yourselves.

    Need to review:

    1. Super-delegates function and purpose. Should they exist at all? Should they vote with the citizens of the State they represent, which returns us to: Should we even have them?

    2. Proportional distribution of the vote. Should winner of the highest vote count take all? If so, you don’t have to worry about super-delegates. Otherwise - how do you divide the super-delegates with porportional voting. This methodology sounds great, but it it becomes difficult to manage in a fair manner (and what is fair?).
    At some point in the process, ultimately, the candidate with the most votes wins - regardless of proportional distribution of delegates.

    3. Timing. Somehow end this effort to be “first” in the nation to vote. It resulted in the MI/FL problem. Make a decision and stike to it. Mostly for the greedy states wanting the money from all the media coverage and politicians.

    4. Math. Compute total delegates available. From the tally of delegate-count-to-date, end the primary season the very day one candidate has the majority - or it is mathematically impossible for other candidates to beat. This would take a lot of the guess work out of this “chaos” and everyone “wondering” how the super delegates will vote (if you feel you still need them).

  4. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    Primaries should be irrelevant.

    Super-delegates should be irrelevant.

    Parties should be irrelevant.

    _Electors_ should be relevant.

  5. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    If we had one person, one vote, Al Gore would have been president in 2000.

    I mean, the RepubliCON controlled Supreme Court wouldn’t have been able to steal the election away from the guy who got the most votes.

    Obviously, our election system needs to be made more democratic.

  6. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    Hey, Alden?

    Move to Russia if you don’t like democracy . . .

  7. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    Listen to AmWay “the Republicans have no problem.”

    Right, AmWay.

    The Republican’s system is totally undemocratic.

    It uses a “winner takes all” delegates for each state won. So if McCain gets a single vote more than Romney in a state like California, he gets all the delegates from California.

    If the Democratic Party used this system, Hillary Clinton–the candidate with fewer votes–would have already won.

    Yeah, great system.

    :roll:

  8. MonkeyHawk
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:20 am | Permalink

    There’s an argument to be made that, with only 40-50% turnout of eligible voters showing up on election day, the Electoral College is a good safeguard from a political movement “gone wild,” or whatever.

    I’m not sure I buy that, but the low turnout of eligible voters is America’s shame.

    In some countries, you have to pay a tax if you don’t vote. Sort of a reverse poll tax.

    Somebody floated an idea where everyone who votes is put into a one-day-only PowerBall type of pool and wins a hundred million dollars, just for voting.

    I never understood why we still vote within about a 12-hour span on a weekday. Keep the polls open from noon Saturday to noon Sunday.

  9. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    Right, MonkeyHawk.

    The two-hour-off-to-vote law is a wholly inadequate safe-guard to allow people to vote.

    It should be a 48 hour holiday with nothing going on except for voting.

  10. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    Capn:

    As a matter of fact, I don’t like Democracy. It’s just a synonym for mob rule. I do, however, like the United States’ REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC system quite a lot.

    If you want to play semantics,
    “Direct Democracy” = bad
    “Indirect Democracy” = good.

    Re-empower the Electoral College!

  11. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    ” never understood why we still vote within about a 12-hour span on a weekday. Keep the polls open from noon Saturday to noon Sunday.”

    I’ve advocated a national holiday every four years. What could be a more important reason to have a day off - than to make sure people vote?

    Imagine who activists, community groups, Eagles, AmLegion, Shriners, Knights of Columbus, and many over civic groups could help get the vote out?

    Bars could offer a free drink to patrons wearing an election “I VOTED” pin. Marathons and races to the polls.

    Knowing they have the day off, people could make plans for parties, BBQ, or whatever - set around knowing the time they are going to the booth.

    What a great day to celebrate our American birthright and promote our responsibility!

    Presidential Election Day as a new Federal Holiday.

  12. Bob
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:00 am | Permalink

    Doesn’t Kansas still close bars on election day?? With the great selection of canidates we have lately, I think the bars should be open, and a barf bag supplied in the voting booth. We need wider choice and better candidates.

  13. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    “The Republican’s system is totally undemocratic.”

    I don’t see it that way. The present election system revolves around the electoral vote. Now if you want to change the constitution to change that, fine. But the states provide electoral voters and in most states, the winner of the state election gets all of the state’s electoral votes.

    It’s in our constitution, which has been around a couple hundred years. That meets your democracy criteria, right?

    Which is what the republican primary mirrors.

  14. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Actually, the Constitution says the states choose electors on Nov 4th (this year) and the electors choose the President (on Dec 15 this year).

    There is nothing in the Constitution that forces an elector to “follow the popular vote.” Nowhere does the Constitution say “winner take all.” Political factions are not mentioned in the Constitution. They are, however, expressly warned against in the Federalist Papers.

    Political Parties are evil, twisted perversions. Primaries are like ancient Rome’s “bread and circuses,” designed to distract a populace from the erosion of its liberties.

    I’ll say it again: Re-empower the Electoral College!

  15. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    Al Gore lost his home state in the election. :)

  16. Tookis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    “Al Gore lost his home state in the election.”

    Regular = mindless twit

  17. Nano
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    I’d like to see political parties outlawed and anyone who claims to be Republican or Democrat imprisioned for 30 days.

  18. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    “There is nothing in the Constitution that forces an elector to “follow the popular vote.”

    Never said there was. But 48 states ARE and the republicans follow suit with their primary.

    “Except for Maine and Nebraska, the entire electoral college vote of a state is won by the slate of electors who receive either a simple majority 50% of the whole number of votes cast by the people of the state.

    In each state, voters vote for a slate of pre-selected candidates for Presidential Elector, representing the various candidates for President. State ballots, however (for ease of understanding the ballot), are designed to suggest that the voters are casting a ballot for the actual candidates for President.

    Currently each state uses the popular vote on Election Day to appoint electors. Although ballots list the names of the presidential candidates, voters within the 50 states and Washington, D.C. are actually choosing electors from their state when they vote for President and Vice President.”

  19. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    The problem with today’s system is not the two political parties, but the fact that there are effectively just two political parties, with due apologies to Libertarians.

    If there were more viable parties, our choices would not be so stark, so divisive or limited.

    As for Election Day, we do need to consider a Saturday or Sunday date to give everyone more opportunity to vote and to reduce the “five o’clock” demand that hits to polls when everyone gets off work.

    As for closing bars on Election Day - allow voting IN bars thus giving voters an instant access to the means of drowning their sorrows while also increasing turnout.

  20. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    “If there were more viable parties, our choices would not be so stark, so divisive or limited.”

    Agreed.

    But of course, we continue to always support dog-gone right or wrong either the blue or red….

  21. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    “reduce the “five o’clock” demand that hits to polls when everyone gets off work.”

    Sorry to break this response up. Just noticed your second thought.

    If we had a national holiday - people could vote throughout the day, all day long. The California
    west coast and time zone issues would not be so great. Early declarations of winners would have less impact if people voted earlier in the day everywhere.

  22. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    “(for ease of understanding the ballot)”

    I think perhaps you mean “For ease of concealing the fact that the constitutional process has been hijacked.”

    Oh, wait. You cut & pasted from Wikipedia. I can go fix it.

  23. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Alden,

    I put the information in quotes. Common sources on the internet. Wikipedia was used - yes.

    But the facts remain the same. No one has stolen anything. THe process remains the same.

    The state laws across the land direct the popular vote be used by their electorals.

    The republican primary didn’t have the problems following similiar process.

    Only in the democratic party - is the “primary” election at risk of being “stolen” by your annoited “SUPER-delegates.”

    The November federal election will be same as always as per the constitution and states rights.

    Facts are the same.

  24. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    American Way,

    There is a table linked in the following link that suggests that while there are some states that have laws binding the electors to popular vote, the number of such states is not a majority.

    http://www.avagara.com/e_c/ec_statelaws.htm

    I am aware the data on the table are old, over 15 years old, in fact. I’ve tried to find more recent information but unsuccessfully. It appears to me that the majority of the states rely upon the informal pledge that the electors will honor the vote, rather than mandating same statutorily.

  25. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

    “rely upon the informal pledge that the electors will honor the vote, rather than mandating same statutorily.”

    Thanks Vaughn. I stand (sit) corrected. Short of going to each state, I used the wiki version, but it’s out there in a number of places that the electorals follow the popular vote of the people of each state.

    The republicans primary is democracy in action.

  26. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Try this link:

    http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/bindingstates.htm

    I found it by googling “faithless electors.” Personally, I think we should retire that term in favor of “true patriots who refuse to brainlessly follow the party line.”

    I like this quote:

    “However, many constitutional scholars agree that electors remain free agents despite state laws and that, if challenged, such laws would be ruled unconstitutional.”

    “Pledges” by the Electors only serve to emasculate the process that the Founding Fathers envisioned.

    The fact that we’ve been doing it wrong for 150+ years doesn’t change the fact that we _are_ doing it wrong — any more than the failure of anyone to sue the Kansas State Legislature for not adequately funding schools for 100+ years doesn’t change the fact that they _were_ inadequately funding them.

    Things don’t become “right” just because we do them for a long time.

  27. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Neither the republican nor the democratic primary system is ‘democracy.’ Democracy is when everybody gets one vote. Democracy has no legislatures, no committees, no candidates. Democracy has everyone voting for what they want to happen, every time a government decision has to be made. Democracy, in brief, is a terrible, stupid idea.

    Political parties are also terrible, stupid ideas. Sadly, they are also unavoidable.

  28. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

    “100+ years doesn’t change the fact that they _were_ inadequately funding them.”

    That is BS too. Until the legislature paid millions for a study - which the schools used in their lawsuit, and a one-man judge ruled using the study too: There was no basis for your statement.

    Inadequately funded? How about today? Enough money for schools? How’s them thar Kansas test scores coming along?

    Inadequate = is in the eyes of the beholder.

  29. Alden Wilner
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    Right. Ignorance is bliss. The legislature’s mistake was funding the study. Until that happened, they could maintain plausible deniability. As soon as the study came back, the clock started ticking — they either had to fund a _second_ study that would show they _were_ adequately funding schools, or wait for someone using their own darned study in a lawsuit against them. And so when someone did that, they hollered “judicial activism! judicial activism!”

    Inadequate is in the eye of the beholder. And when the beholder is a judge, inadequate is also in the eyes of the law. If you don’t like it, you are free to move elsewhere.

    Actually, I don’t think schools are so much “inadequately” funded as “inappropriately” funded. F’rinstance, teaching computer skills to elementary kids when computer h/w doubles in power every 18 months is pointless.

  30. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    Two studies, I believe……

    One judge = entire Kansas Legislature

    Power to the people, right on!

  31. Econ101
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

    Capn
    I heard Al Gore on TV just this week.

    Gore said that it would be “wrong” to say that anyone stole the election.

    Gore defended the integrity of the Supreme Court.

    YOU should try doing the same!

  32. Econ101
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

    Capn
    Actually, I think California is done by Congressional District.

    Alden
    You are wrong.
    The Parties are in charge on picking a nominee.
    The people have consistently chosen people who belong to a political party over “independents” —That is just the way it is and it is perfectly legal.

    Also, I like the Electoral College.

    We are a REPUBLIC

    We are NOT a pure Democracy.

  33. Econ101
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

    But, Alden
    I will admit, if the winner of the Presidential election dies before the Electors meet, I am pretty sure that the electors can vote for someone else, probably the VP candidate but that would not be required, I do not think.

    I would go study the matter, but I need to hit the hay.

  34. Aldenrw
    Posted April 4, 2008 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    Econ101:

    I’d appreciate some clarification as to what I’m “wrong” about.

One Trackback

  1. By michigan secretary of state on April 19, 2008 at 11:35 am

    [...] stoke the fire to reform the whole way the nation picks presidents. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., calledhttp://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/case-building-against-broken-primary-system/Bar, restaurant smoking ban wouldn’t hurt Michigan economy, report says Detroit NewsLANSING –Former [...]