You’ve probably heard the number 37 bandied about, as in, We need to get 37 Republican Electors to abstain or vote for an alternative Republican to stop Trump from donning the moniker “President-Elect.”
There are 29 states in the Union that impose State laws restricting Electors to vote for someone other than the popular vote winner of their state. There are Federal lawsuits pending in California and Washington, but it won't be resolved by Monday. So it got me thinking, which States impose penalties, and of those which are Red States?
Alabama (Code of Ala. §17-19-2) Alaska (Alaska Stat. §15.30.090) California (Election Code §6906) Colorado (CRS §1-4-304) Connecticut (Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-176) Delaware (15 Del C §4303)
District of Columbia (§1-1312(g))
Florida (Fla. Stat. §103.021(1))
Hawaii (HRS §14-28)
Maine (21-A MRS §805)
Maryland (Md Ann Code art 33, §8-505)
Massachusetts (MGL, ch. 53, §8)
Michigan (MCL §168.47)
Mississippi (Miss Code Ann §23-15-785)
Montana (MCA §13-25-104)
Nebraska (§32-714)
Nevada (NRS §298.050)
New Mexico (NM Stat Ann §1-15-9)
North Carolina (NC Gen Stat §163-212)
Ohio (ORC Ann §3505.40)
Oklahoma (26 Okl St §10-102)
Oregon (ORS §248.355)
South Carolina (SC Code Ann §7-19-80)
Tennessee (Tenn Code Ann §2-15-104(c))
Utah (Utah Code Ann §20A-13-304)
Vermont (17 VSA §2732)
Virginia (§24.2-203)
Washington (RCW §29.71.020)
Wisconsin (Wis Stat §7.75) Wyoming (Wyo Stat §22-19-108) “Most of these state laws generally assert that an elector shall cast his or her vote for the candidates who won a majority of the state’s popular vote, or for the candidate of the party that nominated the elector. Over the years, however, despite legal oversight, a number of electors have violated their state’s law binding them to their pledged vote. However, these violators often only face being charged with a misdemeanor or a small fine, usually $1,000. Many constitutional scholars agree that electors remain free agents despite state laws and that, if challenged, such laws would be ruled unconstitutional. Therefore, electors can decline to cast their vote for a specific candidate (the one that wins the popular vote of their state), either voting for an alternative candidate, or abstaining completely. In fact, in the 2000 election, Barbara Lett-Simmons, an elector for the District of Columbia, cast a blank ballot for president and vice president in protest of the District’s unfair voting rights. Indeed, when it comes down to it, electors are ultimately free to vote for whom they personally prefer, despite the general public's desire.
Ok, so even if Electors feel compelled to vote for Trump, or would be replaced, there are still Red States where no penalties, exist, right? How many Electoral votes are in those states?
Arkansas (6)
Arizona (11)
Georgia (16)
Iowa (6)
Indiana (11)
Kansas (6)
Kentucky (8)
Louisiana (8)
Missouri (10)
North Dakota (3)
Oklahoma (7)
South Dakota (3)
Texas (38)
West Virginia (5)
That’s a total of 138 Electors available. This can still be done among states that have no penalties for voting their conscience. Ultimately, they aren’t responsible to political parties, but to the well-being of the Republic and its institutions.
I'm a student of various martial arts. One of the best lessons I learned about self-defense, and really about life, is that if an opponent is trying to throw you off balance, the natural instinct is to try and stop your momentum to regain your balance. Instead, speed up, and accept your lack of balance, but throw your opponent off balance as well. It becomes a fair fight.
Trump revels in being unpredictable. He uses it as a weapon, and it’s very effective. So, let’s see how it impacts him. And, this is a good test of him as a President. We get to see it before 12/19/16 , or 1/16/17 if we get there.
This isn’t normal because we aren't living in a normal situation. I understand the desire to want to get on with life, as it's really hard to feel weighted down by this whole situation. But we’d be mistaken to normalize any of this. To try and accept the abnormality of this, while simultaneously dealing with the routine of life, isn't easy. And that is our challenge. The use of the Electoral college would be unprecedented, but well warranted if you accept the uniqueness of our moment in time. If you can't or unable to accept that reality, then one will always resist the usage of it.
If we really are at threat from Russia at the moment, then we really need to be able to work together. Yesterday, I gave some money to the Hamilton Electors. The funds go to outreach and legal fees the Electors may face for voting their conscience. To be clear, they explicitly DO NOT go to any fines the Electors may face, to avoid any semblance of bribery. If you have the resources, you can help support these efforts here.
They are also coordinating vigils at all 50 state capitals both on Sunday night, and Monday morning. Let's show our support!
Saturday, Dec 17, 2016 · 7:19:48 PM +00:00 · SFLiberal
H/T to mimi9:
Politico published an article about the 10th Circuit Court Ruling last night: “Court: Removing 'faithless' electors may be unconstitutional”
Here's a snippet:
A U.S. Appeals Court appears to have left open a narrow path for more members of the Electoral College to ditch Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
This could open the door to more Republicans voting their conscience:
In a footnote appended to an order issued late Friday in a Colorado lawsuit, a three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals suggested state officials may be constitutionally barred from removing electors once they've started voting.