Too big and red to allow blue-state control

Nancy Pelosi’s HEROES bill includes a vote-by-mail provision; another measure to re-create America’s democracy. Democrats claim abolishing the Electoral College and photo-ID requirements will create a true democracy, which is at odds with the ideals of 1776 (independence) and 1787 (constitutional vision). America’s founding fathers rejected a true democracy, based on the parliamentary model, because they were uniting thirteen colonies and creating a continental nation.

It is a Democrat thinking trap that wants presidents elected by popular vote. They look back to 1992 and see a line of Democrats from 1992 (Bill) to 2024 (Hill) – but for the Electoral College. It is a thinking trap because it assumes independent voters won’t tire of one-party rule, when the history of independent voters suggests otherwise. History suggests the spirit of independence, which rejected a monarch in 1776 and another Clinton in 2016, is embedded in the political center (AKA independent voters).

Even in 1787, the men in Philadelphia knew the constitution must guide the continental nation – large and diverse – to come; therefore, States Rights was not just a slave-state accommodation. Rather, it acknowledged citizens would not be governed by men thousands of miles away. The constitution is the insurance policy that preserves this diverse federation of (50) states; by separating power between the states and Washington and formalizing a system of governmental checks and balances.

COVID-19 has proven the wisdom of 1787: both the liberal governor in New York and conservative governor in Georgia have asserted states rights – not a possibility in France with an all-powerful central state. This is true, and a New York Republican in the Oval Office currently checks and balances a California Democrat in the House – not a possibility in England, where the PM is chosen by Parliament’s majority party.

Democrats have two over-arching election goals: (1) elect the president by popular vote (scrap the Electoral College), and (2) replace voter legitimacy with voter convenience. The rebuttal argument is simple: Nancy Pelosi and Stacey Abrams lack the brilliance of Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison and Washington – and it’s not even close.

The Democrat campaign to end the Electoral College is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, in which states agree to award all their electoral votes to the national popular-vote winner. Sixteen blue states have signed the compact, while states such as Florida, Michigan and Utah have rejected the compact to preserve states rights – because 7 states could choose the House and presidency in 2020; thereby creating 43 powerless states.

Democrats also want to end transparent (one man – one vote) elections in favor of opaque anytime elections. They argue Republican voting laws to prevent fraud are an affront to democratic principle (sneaky schemes to suppress non-Republican votes). Their spokeswoman is Stacey Abrams (D-GA), who lost the Georgia governor’s race by 55,000 votes – and cannot stop alleging Republican vote-suppression.

When 90% of Hispanics and 87% of Blacks have photo IDs, it is possible Ms. Abrams failed to inspire voter turn-out. She persists with her theory, but Republicans have proof of Democrat vote fraud: Judge Dominick DeMuro (D-PA) confessed in May to ballot-stuffing in South Philly to aid Democrat candidates. Republicans hold that for every vote to count, no fraudulent vote can count, because citizens must believe we the people elected the government – not some crooked judge in Philadelphia.

Bill Clinton gave Democrats the winning playbook by winning from sea to shining sea with 370 electoral votes and only 43% of the popular vote. He again schooled Democrats in 2016, blaming Hillary’s midwest strategy (none) for losing working-class whites. Bill Clinton won in 1992 because of Soccer Moms (suburban and white) – in spite of voter-ID laws and the Electoral College. Sadly, today’s Democrats have forgotten 1776 and 1992.

By Spencer Morten

The writer is a retired CEO of a US corporation, whose views were informed by studies and work in the US and abroad. An economist by education, and pragmatist by experience, he believes the greatest threat to peace and prosperity are the loudest voices with the least experience and expertise.