What is the Electors' responsibility?

The Electors are responsible for choosing the president of the United States. Traditionally, they have voted their party's nominee, but there is reason to believe that to do so now will unnecessarily divide the nation. There is an alternative. Electors could look for a widely trusted and respected person who is not partial to any party but who is clearly committed to the interests - to the long-range health - of this nation, and wellbeing of her people.

In a very close election, just a few Electors would be all that is necessary to ensure that a third name is put up for consideration, and with no majority of Electoral votes going to any one person, the House of Representatives would decide, from the top three.

How are Electors Chosen?

Who are the Electors to the President? Does anyone know the names of these people who are the ultimate choosers of the President of these United States? The State Legislatures determine the manner in which the Electors are chosen, but traditionally, the slate of Electors has been nominated by or approved by the two largest political parties. Who knows the details of this process for their state? Tell us about it in the guestbook and forum.

The Process - as I understand it

The Electors have traditionally been hand-picked by the two 'major' political parties, with the party receiving a plurality of votes cast in each State enjoying the privlidge of naming the entire slate of Electors for that State. The Electors, ostensibly chosen by the Legislators, (according to the Constitution), but picked by the parties, then vote for their party's nominee. (This is where I am a bit confused. Who is actually choosing the Electors? Is it the Legislature or the Parties?

If the level of citizen participation in the election falls to one-half or less, and if those who do vote are voting as much against someone as for someone, and if most people feel that the choices presented leave much to be desired--if, when asked who they would like to have as president if they could choose anyone, people say, "someone who is not running"--, the question arises: Is the election a mandate in any sense of the word? Or, is it time for the Electors to set aside tradition and vote their conscience? If not now, when? How low can public confidence in the slate of candidates go before the electors would see a responsibility to look beyond this slate? Should the Constitution be changed to eliminate the role of the Electors? A computer program could much more efficiently perform the function that Electors perform today. But a computer program may not recognize when the data inputed lacks validity.

The tradition of voting for the nominee of the party that receives the largest number of votes in a particular state may be a convenient way for established interests to maintain their grip on power, but it has done little recently to cultivate the sense among the people that they are getting something other than corporate sponsored, advertiser supported candidates.

The Constitution of the United States: Article II, section 1.: . . . Each state shall appoint, in such a Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of Electors...

Important dates for Electors - National Archives

Cronkite for President!
He would do it if we ask. Pass it on...

Franklin Thomas for vice President!
Get him in there with Walter Cronkite. They'd make a great team.

Another way to choose a President

John Champagne

Let me know what you think:

1996 gaiabrainearths@oocities.com

Gaia Brain and the History of Life

Shorter Gaia article | Abstract | Critique

Dvorak Keyboard: Change outmoded patterns of behavior.

Back to the center of the Gaia Brain spiderweb page.

View and Sign my Guestbook