A Short Civics Primer

 

Here are a few things I looked up after wondering – over kool-aids on the porch – about an electoral tie this year.

 

1.      The Electoral College has 538 votes which allows for a tie at 269-269.

 

a.      Each state gets one vote per US house district and one vote for each Senator – that’s an unchanging 535 votes each and every year plus 3 more votes for the District of Columbia.

 

[I hate the fact that DC exists as a political entity – all citizens should live in one of the surrounding states.  But the fact that DC has as many electoral votes as some states and almost as many as many others is far worse.]

 

2.      In the event of a tie, the US House of Representatives selects the new President [12th Amendment].  [It happened twice, 1801 and 1825.]

 

a.      The new House does the voting but not until January 1^st.

 

b.      While the House has 435 members, they only get 50 votes – one for each state.  The first candidate to win the votes of any 26 states is the new president.  [DC gets no vote here.]

 

c.       Each state’s “delegation” of House members decides among themselves how their state’s vote will be cast.  [And they can choose from any of the top three electoral vote getters.  In theory, some total outlier could win.]

 

3.      The Vice President is elected by the Senate.  [It happened once in 1837.]

 

a.      The new Senate does the voting but not until January 1^st.

 

b.      Each Senator gets one vote.  The first candidate to win 51 votes is the new vice president.  

 

c.       So, legislative voting could result in the President and vice president coming from different Parties. 

 

d.      Further, 12^th Amendment language precludes the sitting Vice President from breaking any tie which might occur BUT this is disputed by some legal scholars – think of the possible mess here.

 

4.      Deadlocked chambers – add this to the possible Constitutional dispute mentioned above.

 

a.      The House of Representatives must choose a President-elect in time for the inauguration (noon on January 20).

 

b.      If the House fails, the Twentieth Amendment specifies that the Vice President-elect becomes Acting President until the House should select a President. 

 

c.       If the winner of the vice presidential election is also not known by then, then under the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, the sitting Speaker of the House would become Acting President until either the House should select a President or the Senate should select a Vice President.  None of these situations has ever occurred.

 

One last thought about all this and our current divisive political representatives.  Remember the walkouts of Democrats from the Texas and Wisconsin state legislative sessions?  Well, the Twelfth Amendment requires two thirds of the states to be present in the US House for Presidential voting and two thirds of US Senators to be present for vice presidential voting.  Imagine the utter mess these jerks could make.

 

And finally, as I read it, if the both Houses of Congress were to remain deadlocked until March 4^th, then the “sitting vice president” would become acting President until they acted.  Joe Biden would become President.  Just think of the mess the obstructionists could create.

The Real Fiscal Cliff – Please Vote for Romney

 

 

My son sent me this interesting video.

 

Part of our problem in America is that we turn each other off with our discourse.  Watch this 5 minute video;  it lays out the simple facts of America’s fiscal catastrophe.  What we’re doing is nation ruining and one does not need to know anything more than kitchen table, checkbook economics to see it.

 

Now please just pay attention to Hal Mason’s numbers;  ignore the occasional heated rhetoric, pictures of falling Trade Towers and the like.  His numbers come from the official Obama budget;  Mason is not making things up.  I provide the links below so you can see for yourself.

 

Please, watch this.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW5IdwltaAc

 

N and I are convinced that the nation’s single most important problem is the deficit and resulting national debt.  The fiscal issues are so critical as to far outweigh every other national problem combined.  If we let the country go bankrupt, it just won’t matter whether or not our kids are illiterate or gays can’t marry.

 

By 2022 the interest on our debt will be almost $1 trillion per year and that assumes both unrealistic GDP growth and unrealistic borrowing costs in the later years of the 10 year period See Summary Table S-14.  If we go down this path, GDP growth will be far lower than the President’s assumption of 6% and borrowing costs will far exceed the assumed 4%. 

 

At the moment, the debt per taxpayer is $141,204 each.  The President plans to add another $trillion a year to the debt so in 2022 my grandchildren – should they choose to work for a living – will owe around $230,000 each.  Folks, the deficits not only have to go away but turn to surplus in order to pay down the debt. 

 

And, the biggest problem inside the deficit is us.  Not only do 43% of American households pay zero income tax, we pillars of the community take out far more in benefits than we pay in.  Look again at entitlements in the budget.

 

 

In 2013 we’ll spend $3.60 for every dollar we put into Medicare;  in 2022 we’ll take out $4.38 for every dollar we put in.  Boys and girls, we are not paying our own way.

 

Skip the silly rhetoric and you’ll see that Mason’s conclusion is correct.  It is up to us as voters to never forget that the fiscal issue is the only issue for the moment and to vote for those that get it.  President Obama doesn’t get it;  maybe Romney does.  It’s our hope the nation gives Romney a chance – while making an example of President Obama as we did to the 111^th Congress.  And if Romney fails we must keep dumping the Executive and legislators until we find folks who’ll tell us the truth and act on it.

 

The President’s 2013 Budget at the OMB

            http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview/

            National Debt Clock
            http://www.usdebtclock.org/

The Presidential Debates

 

For those of us who follow politics as a hobby, this campaign season has felt like the most depressing period of our lives. 

 

We have big national problems and we seem to be on the cusp of a critical national debate about everything American:  individual liberty, communitarianism, personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, the role of government, Constitutionalism vs populism and not just the status of the American Dream but its very definition.  So what do we get from the candidates and the media?  Utter piffle;  a near perfect reflection of the ignorant opinion that dominates the media and the national discourse.  It’s sad and it’s boring.

 

We hear from the experts that Obama has won the election;  his supporters say it while the Romney crowd denies with a no that sounds like yes.  Of course these folks can’t agree on anything:  money is everything, no it doesn’t matter;  it’s a base election, no it’s about the independents;  the polls are wrong [nonsense];  the polls are biased [too often true];  TV ads win elections, no they’re a waste of money;  the debates are crucial, no they never matter.

 

In a recent Stossel segment, he interviews veteran campaign managers and they tell us exactly how they train their candidates to win.  We learn again that we can never have factual debate during a campaign.  As these folks put it, the coming debates will change nothing as a result of substance;  any serious change in the race will be the result nuance, accident or even perceived nuance, like a sigh.  The candidates are trained – very specifically and diligently – not to answer questions but instead beat the talking point drum.

 

Moderator: “Sir, does the sun rise in the east?”  Candidate: “Thank you for that excellent question Susie.  Let me respond by saying that my plan for creating jobs in this country is so widely accepted that the birds in the trees sing Sousa marches whenever I talk about it.”

 

Moderator: “But sir you didn’t answer my question.”  Candidate: “Why thank you Susie for giving me a chance to clarify.  My opponent has no plan that makes the birds sing and if he is elected, he’ll destroy life as we know it.”  [Rapturous applause from half the audience if such is allowed.]

 

A recent George Will column suggests some serious questions for debating candidates.  But the reader immediately perceives that such questions would turn off the mass audience – when I read the column to my bride, she said she didn’t even understand some of the questions.  But we can dream.  Will’s questions ridicule the campaign substance and the candidates on both sides.  What fun that would be. 

 

Debate Questions for the Candidates

By George F. Will, September 28, 2012, The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-debate-questions-for-the-presidential-candidates/2012/09/28/231ff27e-08fb-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_story.html?wprss=rss_george-will

 

Stossel Site – the segment I mention wasn’t there yet when I wrote the post.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/index.html

 

[Note: for those who get the links deleted by their networks, try going to my blog page or Googling the item tiles.  The blog page is here: http://dljsrant.blogspot.com/ or Google DJ’s Rantings.]

 

I would have my readers look at this great column by Will and watch the debates to judge the moderators.  Were their questions good or campaign-like;  did the questions address crucial issues or populist diversions?  Was the moderator able to get answers or did the candidate just change the subject?  If we want change, we’ll have to pay enough attention to demand it.

 

I’m disappointed with the failure of my generation to be anything but greedy and self serving:  we demand that the government balance the budget but scream don’t touch ours;  we don’t care if government, on our watch, made promises that cannot be kept.  At the moment, this disgraceful and natural human attitude appears to have filtered down to my children’s generation because they seem poised to let President Obama off the accountability hook.

 

The President can’t do any of the stuff candidates promise;  jobs, growth, abortion, gay marriage, etc – Congress does that stuff.  Presidents lead.  A President’s job is to get the public signed up for the stuff the President bullies and maneuvers the Congress into doing.  President Obama has failed at this key responsibility because he’s just not a very good negotiator.  Success demands accountability and as I see it, this President must be replaced – as well as many legislators just like him – or we delay the return of competent government. 

 

I still believe that the election is for the center to decide.  Forty percent of Americans have still have a brain – that’s far more than those who are progressives, climate crazies, Bible thumpers or libertarians.  Yes, I have to admit that the loonies are 60% of the nation and otherwise intelligent people are picking sides rather than focusing on real national priorities.

 

Just for the record, I am not signed up for the hysteria that seems to be connected with this election which goes something like, “If my enemy wins, it’ll be Armageddon.”  That’s the stuff cultists and AM radio.  I’m with Edmund Burke who is paraphrased as saying that the individual is foolish, but the species is wise.  I agree with that wholeheartedly and I believe it applies better in America than anywhere else.  At the same time, we must remember what Burke actually said:

 

“The individual is foolish;  the multitude, for the moment is foolish, when they act without deliberation;  but the species is wise, and, when time is given to it, as a species it always acts right.”

 

So.  If we can’t get right this time, we shouldn’t give up.  I cling to this optimism in the face of what I see as growing ignorance of the pending fiscal catastrophe.