Many people want to reform the Electoral College.

The Maximum Leader’s new minion Molly, as a Texas Democrat, perhaps feels a bit frustrated that, for the foreseeable future, her votes in presidential elections will be meaningless.

Many people who live outside the “battleground states” would like to see more attention lavished on their area of the country.

Sorry to disappoint you folks, but it t’aint gonna happen.

According to Article V of the United States Constitution:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Amending the constitution is hard. First you have to get a two thirds majority in both houses. Than you have to get three quarters of the states to ratify it. For a reform of the Electoral College, this hurdle is insurmountable.

Lemme ’splain.

The Electoral College favors Republicans; the smaller, more sparsely populated states are heavily Republican. Their Republican Senators would never vote to diminish the proportional influence of their own constituents or of their own party. So a proposed Amendment would never be able to pass the Senate, let alone get ratified by three quarters of the states.

Well, many people would argue, if the Electoral College can’t be revised out of existence, than let each state pass a Colorado style measure. That’s not going to happen either.

States that want more attention in national elections currently don’t receive attention because their citizens will reliably give a majority to one or the other party. But the political party that has the majority in each of those states will not support a proportional allocation of electors because that political party would essentially be giving away a percentage of their own party’s votes in the electoral college.

As Molly may have noticed from the redistricting fights, Texas Republicans play for keeps. Can you imagine the Republican-dominated legislature of Texas agreeing to give away forty percent of the electoral votes by abandoning the winner-take-all sttus quo? I can’t either. The same could be said for Massachusetts.

Colorado is anomalous. Other states will be loathe to follow her example. Ironically, Colorado may be giving up the attention she is currently receiving from Bush and Kerry. If the proportional allocation plan passes, party strategists will acknowledge that Colorado’s electoral votes will probably be evenly split; why would they spend money and effort to shave a few percentage points and get one more elector when they can get more bang for their buck in a state that remains winner-take-all?

So basically, folks: Get used to it. The electoral college is here to stay.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader really enjoys the private correspondence he is able to have with some minions. Oftentimes these minions ask wonderfully pointed questions, or request that your Maximum Leader opine on something or another. Many writing minions have their own blogs. But sometimes your Maximum Leader is lucky enough to strike up a conversation with a non-blog-owning minion.

This brings your Maximum Leader to his divine minion Molly. The divine minion Molly has requested that your Maximum Leader opine on a number of issues. Alas, many of them require some thoughtful reflection. Time for thoughtful reflection has been short as your Maximum Leader has been spending most of his free time watching baseball on TV.

Now, your Maximum Leader doesn’t want to disappoint Molly, or keep her waiting much longer for at least one response. Molly, you see, is a gun-toting Texas Democrat. And being a Democrat in Texas, especially after that whole redistricting thing, means that you can become cranky very quickly. Your Maximum Leader, while very secure in the fortress that is the Villainschloss, doesn’t want to disappoint and make cranky a gun-toting Texan. So, here is the first part of what will be a multipart series of your Maximum Leader opining for Molly.

The divine minion Molly writes your Maximum Leader:

I’d like to know your opinion on the Electoral College. I’m sorry Alexander Hamilton, but I can read and write and I don’t need someone to vote for me. At least let’s update it. I think I’m going to start a petition.

Well, honestly, your Maximum Leader doesn’t think too often about the Electoral College. In fact he generally only thinks about it every 4 years.

First your Maximum Leader must stick up for Alexander Hamilton. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t believe that Hamilton thought people were illiterate and needed their betters to vote for president on their behalf. Hamilton and the other Framers thought that the yeomen farmers (frontier smallholders if you will) may not have enough exposure to the news of men of stature who should be elected president. While this may have been true in 1787, it wasn’t true by 1800. As you can learn from reading Democracy in America, Americans read newspapers and other broadsheets voraciously and were probably better informed in 1804 than they are in 2004.

But while we are talking about the Framers it is important to understand their concerns that led to the creation of the Electoral College. The Framers were not big believers in democracy. They were big believers in democratic republics. It was important not to have rule by the mob, but rule by elected represenatives. In this spirit the Electoral College makes perfect sense. Think about it. The nation was a collection of autonomous states. (This is in 1787 remember.) The people elected the House of Representatives. The states elected the Senate. And it made sense for some sort of blend of the two to elect the president.

Overall, your Maximum Leader believes the system has worked better than the Framers planned. Many of the Framers thought that elections would regularly go to the House of Represenatives because no person would win in the Electoral College. (Your Maximum Leader seems to remember some Framers assuming that the president would be elected from the membership of the House every year.)

That said, given what has happened in our recent past, reform might be in order. And it seems as though Molly has already given thought to this course with her petition.

And speaking of refom of the Electoral College, the people of Kilgore’s home state have already started work on changing how their electors are distributed. In Colorado, Proposition (Amendment) 36, if approved, would distribute Electors to candidates in proportion to the percentage of the popular vote the candidate won. (If you care to click the link, it is a PDF. Amendment 36 begins on page 13 of 59.)

While your Maximum Leader has never given much thought to proportional distribution of Electoral votes, he does not favour Colorado’s ballot measure. He wouldn’t support it, if he were eligible to vote in Colorado, because it would take effect in this election. That is generally a bad idea. Run elections according to a set of rules that everyone knows in advance. Change them in 2008 if you want, but change them this year. No.

Your Maximum Leader doesn’t mind the idea of Electoral College reform. But it isn’t something for which he is going to agitate. He is not in favour of amending the US Constitution. (Which is, as we all know, very hard to do.) (Luckily.)

According to current law and practice, states determine how their own Electors are allocated. All practice the “winner-take-all” format. Your Maximum Leader supposes that the advantage to proportional allocation of Electors is that it puts every state in play. Living in Virginia, as your Maximum Leader does, he doesn’t get much attention from either candidate. Virginia (contrary to the Kerry internal polling) is almost certainly going to remain Republican.

Excursus: Your Maximum Leader only says “almost certainly” because, like sports, no one really knows how it will turn out until the election is held.

Your Maximum Leader would like to get a little more attention to his beloved Commonwealth from the major party candidates. Proportional allocation of Virginia’s Electoral votes may accomplish that.

Proportional allocation of Electors has some downsides though. There are two major downsides.

The first major downside as your Maximum Leader sees it is the elimination of the single greatest benefit the Electoral College has shown over its history; mandate generation.

Yes, dear minions. Mandate generation. Let us look at President Reagan in 1984. An election considered a complete total landslide by almost any reckoning. Reagan got 58% of the popular vote and 525 Electoral votes. Proportional electoral allocation would have had Reagan get 312 Electoral votes. Still enough to win, but not the 525 to 13 trouncing he gave to Walter Mondale.

How about Reagan in 1980? Reagan got 51% of the popular vote and 489 Electoral votes. Proportional allocation would give Reagan 274 Electoral votes. An Electoral squeeker.

The second major downside would be close elections would be sent to the House of Representatives (as the Framers envisioned).

Let us not forget our good friend and drinking buddy William Jefferson Clinton. President Clinton received 43% of the popular vote in 1992. But he received 370 Electoral votes. (G.H.W. Bush got 37% and 168 respectively.) In 1996, President Clinton received 49 % of the popular vote; but won 379 Electoral votes. (Bob Dole got 40% and 159 respectively.)

Let us look at the Clinton victories. Had proportional electoral allocation been in effect nationally in 1992, Clinton would not have received the 270 Electoral votes needed to win. He would have gotten 231. The outcome of the election would have been decided by the House of Representatives, and Clinton would have been elected. Since the House was Democratically controlled.

But in 1996, Clinton would have gotten only 264 electoral votes. If the election goes to the House again Clinton doesn’t pull it out. Why? Because the Republicans take over the House in the 1996 elections. And the first thing the new Republican Congress has to do is certify the results of the Electoral College vote. They would certify that no candidate gt 270 votes, and then decide for themselves. And your Maximum Leader is not so naive to believe that party affiliation wasn’t going to influence a vote…

So, on the whole you Maximum Leader doesn’t see the need for much change of the system. It works well, generally. What would really help us, in your Maximum Leader’s opinion, is a change in the way we vote. What is wrong with the way we used here in Virginia for many years… You take a division.

What is take a division you ask? Well, all the eligible voters go to the Courthouse and they go into a room. Once in the room, the judge asks all voters for Candidate X to move to one side, and everyone for Candidate Y to move to the other side. Then you take a head-count. Clean, efficient, and everyone’s intent is known. (None of this pregnant chad stuff.)

Note to Minions: Your Maximum Leader doesn’t feel the need to keep this “secret ballot” stuff in the MWO. Remember that.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t know why an earlier post on this subject that he wrote didn’t take. Ah! The things that happen on the internet.

Anyhow…

Your Maximum Leader wrote some pithy comments on that recent ABC News Poll which seemed to find that Republicans have better sex than Democrats. But they seem to be lost forever. Never fear however. As always, Jeff at Beautiful Atrocities puts it much better in his Disposable Wisdom piece.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is experiencing a little schadenfreude and what must be some suffering of our friend Keith Burgess-Jackson. But your Maximum Leader is sure it is not only the good doctor is suffering, but also many Yankees fans out there. Allow them to suffer. Their gloating and preening for decades deserves to be repayed in spades. Didn’t God say that once? “Vengence is mine, I shall repay.”

Maybe it was Leo Tolstoy. (Who is like a God… At least from the perspective of Russian Literature.)

Carry on.

Let’s see if the technologically-impaired Smallholder can manage to post a couple of pictures:

The Battle of Trafalgar

The Death of Nelson

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is in a festive mood. Why you ask? Because today is the 199th anniversary of the most decisive naval battle in the history of man. It is the 199th anniversary of the most glorious British naval victory in their long and illustrious history.

Yes, my minions. Today is the 199th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar.

Trafalgar was the last and greatest victory of Admiral Viscount Horatio Nelson. His brilliant battle plan (splitting his fleet into two columns and penetrating the Franco-Spanish line) was a smashing success.

At 11:48 on October 21st, 1805, Nelson’s flagship the HMS Victory signaled to the fleet, “England expects that every man will do his D-U-T-Y.”

At 11:50, the battle was met.

At 13:15, Nelson was shot.

At 16:30, Nelson died knowing the battle was won.

If you would like to learn more about the Battle of Trafalgar here are a few links:

Broadside. (Very good)

The Napoleonic Guide (Some pop-ups.)

And of course, the HMS Victory site.

Normally, your Maximum Leader would throw a big party for all of his minions at the Villainschloss this Saturday to celebrate. These celebrations, have in years past, been grand affairs. (Normally including lots of Steamship rounds of beef, kegs of Bass Ale, and lots of revelry.) This year, due to some other concerns, there will not be a grand fest. But next year, the 200th anniversary, there will be a great fest.

Tonight, your Maximum Leader will pull out his Nelson Rum Mug and pour himself some Pussers and toast Lord Nelson and the hardy Tars of the Royal Navy for saving us all from the French Emperor.

Carry on.

I recently posted on what I perceived to be an intersting phenomenon: Democrats were not nearly as unified behind their man as the Republicans were. I wondered why cracks were not appearing in the monolithic GOP facade. Evidently I spoke too soon — some Republicans are going to vote against their man after all. If Kilgore Trout and Stuart Benjamin over at the Volokh Conspiracy are representative samples, the incumbent is in for a long night in early November.

The meat of Kilgore’s argument:

Here are four reasons I believe the Iraq War has weakened America’s fight
against terrorism:

The minimum $200 billion we will spend on this war could have been better
spent on improving homeland security and thwarting terrorist plots through
intelligence and law enforcement actions.
This war has overextended our
military and left us ill-equipped to respond to legitimate terrorist
threats.
This war has infuriated the Muslim world, making it fertile ground
for terrorist recruiters.
This war has taught terrorist organizations that
the U.S. can be goaded into fighting the wrong war and wasting resources that
could have been used to destroy them.

Some Bush supporters have criticized Kerry’s plans for
Iraq, and with good reason (why does Kerry think that other nations, who didn’t
want ny part of the war when it began, would want to risk blood and treasure
now?) But are Bush’s plans for Iraq any better? Not that I can tell — I
examined his website and could find no
definite strategy for dealing with the problems in Iraq, or even a hint of
recognition that problems exist in Iraq. And here’s the clincher for me: Bush
got us into this mess, so he gets the blame. I’m not going to blame Kerry for
not having a good solution for Iraq, because nobody has a good solution for
Iraq. There might not be a good solution for Iraq. People aren’t calling it a
“quagmire” because it’s a good Scrabble word.**

I want to keep writing. I want to describe in withering detail every reason
I have to vote against George W. Bush. I want to write about the Federal
Marriage Amendment and how it symbolizes Bush’s eagerness to mangle the law of
the land to suit his narrow, bigoted religious views. I want to write about
Bush’s bungling of the economy and about the jobs he’s lost. I want to write
about the ballooning deficits Bush has created through profligate spending and
irresponsible tax cuts. I want to write about the arrogance of the Bush
Administration, about its refusal to admit when it’s moving in the wrong
direction, about its willingness to use 9/11 to hack away at civil liberties,
about its cronyism, about its cynicism, about its intolerance for criticism,
about its willful twisting of facts and logic, about its endless grasping for
more and greater power.

The meat of Mr. Benjamin’s argument:

First, on the issue of this President’s policies, many commentators have
ably pointed out the myriad ways in which this President has been a disaster
for
those who believe in limited government… tax cuts without spending
cuts (or,
as it turns out, with massive
spending increases) aren’t small government - they’re big government
combined with borrowing…

…”Fine,” some libertarian friends
have said to me, “I admit that Bush has
been bad for limited government, but
won’t electing Kerry be worse for our
interests?” As for the short- and
medium-term, the great likelihood is that the
answer is no. Unless something
truly disastrous happens to the Republican party
(e.g., finding out that
Osama Bin Laden received money from the RNC), it is
going to retain control
of the House of Representatives… This means that a
President Kerry is
going to be dealing with a hostile Congress - and Tom Delay
is not going to
roll over. In other words, we are likely to get the same sort of
gridlock
that we had from 1995 to 2000, with no significant new spending and no
significant new tax cuts - greater fiscal sanity and a smaller government.
Again, this is not just pie in the sky. Niskanen also showed that divided
government is associated with lower government
spending…

…But what about the long-term interests of those
who want a limited
government? Here we come to the most important point that
many have overlooked:
if limited-government types vote for Bush and he is
reelected, then the obvious
conclusion for any savvy political strategist is
that Republicans can take these
voters for granted and thus ignore their
interests… The only way to send a
message to future Republican candidates
is for Bush to lose in part because of
the defection of limited-government
types. And, if we don’t send that message, I
fear that we will be in the
political wilderness for a long time.

The bottom line, in my view, is
that people who believe in the old
Republican credo of limited government
had better vote for John Kerry.

I remember asking the Maximum Leader in 2000: “So, you’re a Republican. Who are you going to vote for since there isn’t a Republican in the race?”

The Presidential Election turns out to be a family affair.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader doffs his bejeweled floppy hat to the Boston Red Sox. Certainly this is one of the greatest (if not the greatest) comeback in baseball history. Every game hard faught. Every player giving their all. Every decision a nailbiter. It is absolutely amazing to behold.

As many minions know, your Maximum Leader is a National League man. He prefers the style of play in the NL. He prefers the speed of play in the NL. He prefers that in order to bat you have to play the field.

Normally, when this time of year comes around; that is to say World Series time. Your Maximum Leader, if not rooting for his (choker) Braves, roots for the NL team. This year, your Maximum Leader is falling in with all those starry-eyed romantics and long-suffering New Englanders and will pull for the Red Sox.

Now, your Maximum Leader has long experience with the Red Sox, and their fans. His college roommate was a Sox fan. Mrs. Villain’s family hails from New England and are (mostly) Sox fans. Your Maximum Leader’s esteemed brother-in-law was born in Boston and is a life-long fan. (Your Maximum Leader’s esteemed brother-inlaw also took your Maximum Leader to baseball games at Fenway Park (including one during the ALCS last year)). So, it is from a position of some experience from which he speaks…

Beating the Yankees is a wonderful thing. Winning the AL Pennant is a great accomplishment that speaks to the never-say-die spirit of the team. Be warned! There are still 4 more victories needed to exorcize the demons that have haunted the team since the early years of the last century. The Sox can still screw it up. To make a metaphor that my beloved Sadie can appreciate. It is possible that the Sox have prematurely ejaculated their karmic load by beating the Yankees.

The NL is going to send a formidable team to play the Sox. The Cardinals were the best team in baseball over the regular season. They have an offensive corps that easily matches (bat-for-bat) the Red Sox. The Card’s pitching might not be quite up to the level that the Sox have. But the Card’s have shown they can step up and win.

If it is the Astros representing the NL, you have a great storyline. Roger Clemens coming back to the town where he spent the best years of his career to battle for the crown that eluded him during his time there. The Astros have a good lineup of batters as well. And they have been playing for their lives.

It is something of a tragedy that the NL series has been given rather short shrift by the sporting media. Indeed your Maximum Leader wonders if the World Series will be something of an anti-climax compared to the hype of the ALCS. Or he wonders if the attention given to the ALCS will give extra motivation to the NL team. That coupled with the hex that seems to settle on the Sox when they come close to the crown may give extra motivation to the NL team to win.

Regardless of how it turns out, it will be great baseball. Your Maximum Leader hopes that it will be a series worthy of the play we have seen thus far.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader saw a photo of a billboard put up by an Aussie woman who wants a husband.

Your Maximum Leader will now tell you why this woman’s vain attempt to advertise her way to matirmony will fail.

Line item one of the billboard. Non-drinker. Great Jeezy Chreezy! Your Maximum Leader has NEVER EVER met an Aussie who doesn’t knock one (or two, or three, or a half dozen) back every now and again. Indeed, your Maximum Leader might even go so far as to say that the Aussies are the greatest drinkers in the world. Aussies are, if your Maximum Leader may use a term he hasn’t used in this forum before, Heroic Drinkers!

The Russians may actually drink more. But they are more melancholy in general and not the cheerful happy drinkers that Aussies are.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader, in the absence of the AirMarshal, will take a moment to point out inportant goings-on from the world of distilled spirits.

In this space we have previously discussed the reintroduction of George Washington’s whisky. Now it seems that the Bourbon and Whisky distillers of the United States are taking a (successful) page from the Scots and creating a new Bourbon trail.

Leaving aside the implications of millions (thousands… okay, hundreds) of Americans driving across vast distances of our great land going from distillery to distillery (think about it), this is a great idea. It really sounds like a great luxury bus tour in fact. Or even better… A choice of vacation on the American Orient Express. That is a train ride your Maximum Leader would gladly go on.

The only problem with such a tour would be remembering it when it was all done. Your Maximum Leader supposes that is what they have cameras for.

Carry on.

Geek Quiz

I scored 425 geek points but redeemed myself with 485 non-geek points for a total score of -60.

I think the weighting must be off because I might be a bit geeky.

I wonder how the other Ministers will do. I think the Air Marshal is screwed, what with all the computer stuff to run up his score.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader, once again, spent all night watching television. He watched that Red Sox/Yankees game. Wow! What great baseball! Your Maximum Leader doesn’t believe he is mentally capable of describing how good this series is without resorting to all the clichés you can read elsewhere.

Yesterday, while composing the Tuesday Sports Roundup post, your Maximum Leader believed that both series (AL & NL) were living up to the highest expectations of baseball fans. Today, he believes that the Red Sox/Yankees seies is far exceeding the highest expectations of baseball fans (and red-blooded Americans).

Yesterday, your Maximum Leader felt that if the game was called on account of rain, the Yankees would regroup and win game 6 whenever it was played. He felt that if they played, the Red Sox would have an edge; but you just couldn’t call it.

If the Red Sox don’t have a huge advantage now, your Maximum Leader doesn’t believe they ever will. The Sox (Sawks - as the natives speak it) are tired. They are battered. They have given everything they have physically and mentally. And they are giving more.

The Yankees are just as tired, worn-down, and depleted as the Sox. But they have been, as your Maximum Leader wrote yesterday, on the receiving ends of the blows. This must have some sort of effect on their play tonight.

Your Maximum Leader believes that the Yankees may be beaten mentally already. The Sox may see their place in history and are giving up everything to attain that place. The Yankees may not have the mental strength to stop them.

These games are amazing to watch. This is as high a drama as sports can possibly produce. Your Maximum Leader knows that many of his Ministers are not big baseball fans. That is sad in some ways. Baseball, while not the bastion of Americanna that it once was, is still so deeply rooted in our national conscience. This history between these teams and the long-standing bitterness just add to the drama.

In over a century of playing the game in a way that we would recognize it, no team has forced a game 7 after being down 3-0. That is incredible. If the Sox win, and your Maximum Leader is inclined to think they will, they will be the first team EVER to come back and beat an opponent who had them down, pinned, and was going for the coup de grâce.

If the Sox win the AL Pennant, they could just go all the way.

Carry on.

Frank at IMAO links to responses to the Guardian’s attempt to influence politics in Ohio.

My only complaint about these letters is that those laced with profanity were also poorly written. Why, oh why, can we not compose letters that are both literate AND profane?