Electing a US President in Plain English

http://commoncraft.com A short guide to understanding the U.S. election process.
This video comes in an unbranded "presentation quality" version that can be licensed for use in the workplace.

• Category

  Education

[isthispanosuiza]

full disclosure: for th most part, in th last 3 or so posts, i am paraphrasing (for th sake of 'succinct-ity' har!) the article & research of th esteemed H Hertzberg. he's th knowledgeable & conscientious researcher-journalist.

i'm but a latter-day derriere-gardist troop (tiredly plodding in that old American tradition that boasts th likes of woody guthrie, joe hill & (FTM) pete seeger et al.) carrying anti-Capitalist flags whenever i detect a pertinent political conversation in th werks.

[isthispanosuiza]

It gets worse. In th Constitution’s Art. V (outlines th process for amendments, 1 type of amendment forbidden: “[N]o State- shall b deprived of its equal Suffrage n th Senate.”

However 1 change IS possible—we could pick th President th way we pick . . . our other elected officials: by vote OF TH PEOPLE, w/ th winner being th candidate favored by th largest number of voters in th nation. It’s called National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPV)

Interested? see this dotcom> "nationalpopularvote"

[isthispanosuiza]

for Bohemians everywhere: hertzberg continues:

. . . we’re stuck w/ political inequalities built into the U.S. Senate: In 1789, the population ratio between the most and least populous state was 11 to one. Now it’s 66 to one.

Alexander Hamilton (Constitutional Convention, in Philly), I paraphrased here:

“As states r a collection of individuals; which ought we to respect more, the rights of PEOPLE composing them, or ARTIFICIAL beings resulting from electoral jiggering processes of states?”

[isthispanosuiza]

Brendan de Caires asks: Why is it so hard to rein in those 'vested interests' in politics?Should we suppose the US Constitution’s MOST IMPORTANT QUIRKS AND BIASES

—the electoral college (where ACREAGE TRUMPS POPULATION in political representation)—

are now practically IRREVOCABLE?”

In his 25 April New Yorker article: The Weirdest Sentence in the US Constitution,

Hendrik Hertzberg says, Most of the big ones ARE (practically irrevocable).

bohemian, yr invited! Next post: all is NOT yet clear!

[bohemianhippee]

This just made it very clear. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

[bohemianhippee]

Both parties have done reapportioning to serve their purposes.

[isthispanosuiza]

redistricting in the state of Texas would be a good study target, for an inquiry into the wretched ways districts are 'distorted' in order to HAR! sequester certain voting blocs (such as blacks, hispanics, or DEM in the case of Texas at the moment) so that the number of districts that will vote those sympathies or programs will be LESS than the other 'party'

[isthispanosuiza]

that is a legitimate email address, and i WILL respond. these are important issues, and have to do with real 'education' and with having an informed "electorate" so one day, what is a juryrigged system, may be transformed, or replaced with somehting that is democratic, and truly representative . . . more to come on this. i welcome the struggle, and the quest for enlightenment for us, one and all.

[isthispanosuiza]

2nd comment: . . . To start with, one MUST question and answer, "how are those byzantine squiggley lines that make the 'districts' get drawn! who draws them? well, politicians do the drawing; and you can bet they have their partisan stakes in how those districts fall--look up 'gerrymandering' at this point. NEXT . . . but, why spoil all the fun right now!!?

if you want to know more, e mail me at 'socialist@mail.com. for real.