FOR just over a century, collectivists/statists, calling themselves “progressives”, have been diligently working to expand government power while reducing individual liberties. Huge, hulking bureaucratic government appeals to them because, as “leaders”, they expect to be in charge of it one day, and the limitless, unaccountable authority the departments, bureaux and offices wield is exactly what they need to ‘correct’ society’s myriad errors and faults. Moreover, a massive administrative leviathan will strangle this nation in a quagmire of regulations and brake its economic growth with confiscatory taxation, allowing other nations to overtake America politically, economically, commercially and militarily, something the international, professional left has been working to accomplish for over a century. Control of the nation through a single central government, precisely what the Founding Fathers worked to avoid, is the left’s primary agenda.
When I have explained this obvious reality to many of the dumbed-down Americans who unwittingly help it along, they at first deny its existence, then ask, “Why would anybody want to do that?” as if a rationale unconvincing to them proves it isn’t happening at all. Like standing on the deck of the U.S.S. Oklahoma on Battleship Row at Ford Island thinking, on that December Sunday morning, “I’m not firing one round of 1.1-inch at those Kate’s and Val’s until I know exactly why they’re attacking us.”
Either an outright elimination of the Electoral College by Constitutional amendment, or an underhanded, stealthy stab-in-the-back like the so-called “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact”, which Delaware joined the last Friday in March, will have the same effect: Like dominoes, each key brick in the Constitutional wall, designed to preserve the individuality of the states and to prevent the federal government from becoming the only government, will begin to fall.
With the College effectively gone, and the president chosen by the 8 or 10 largest cities in the half-dozen largest states, the entire electoral dynamic in the nation will shift very quickly. A main purpose of the Senate is to ensure that states with small populations, like Delaware, Alaska or Rhode Island, would have an equal voice in the senate and wouldn’t be irrelevant in the congress as a whole. The Electoral College comprises 535 electors, equaling the total number of congressional representatives in the House and Senate. With the College gone, no American’s presidential vote, outside of the large coastal and Midwestern leftist Democrat cities, will matter. A nauseating whine of the Mediacrat party is that smaller, rural states, in our federal, bicameral system, are “over-represented” , which, by necessity, would mean that New York, California and Illinois are, somehow, under-represented, so eliminating the College just gets things “properly balanced”. It should come as no surprise that Soros and his friends are part of the financial force behind the popular vote compact.
Make no mistake: eliminating major democratic institutions has been the modern left’s agenda for over a century.
Once a succession of leftist presidents are elected by overwhelming “popular” votes, it will quickly become obvious to the ruling class that the states themselves, and the U.S. senate with them, no longer serve any real purpose. The concentrated Democrat leftist population centers will elect Democrat presidents permanently, and Americans in the heartland will simply no longer matter. They’ll be a shrinking population anyway, socially engineered to pay for a welfare-based expansion of the urban poverty industry. And as soon as the very states themselves are legislated out of existence (Constitutionally? You’re joking, right?), the Washington ruling class can do anything they want to.
With states, and states’ rights, a thing of the past, the professional left will establish a new “dictatorship of the proletariat” or anything else they feel like. And unless you’re a community organizer in one of the bigger urban centers, you’ll have something like less-than-zero real input, on any meaningful level, into the actions and finance of the U.S. government.
The Interstate Compact, which doesn’t “kick-in” until the member states carry 270 electoral votes (189 are in as of this writing¹), is actually unlikely to pass Constitutional muster since its purpose is to defeat a central, defining element of Article II, §1, the establishment of the Electoral College itself. Article I, §10, cl.3 prohibits any state from entering “…into any Agreement or Compact with another State…”*, so that may void this subversive idea without further discussion.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, dreamt up by law professors (and brothers) Akhil Reed Amar and Vikram Amar, is ultimately designed to render America a single, large country, not the unique nation of united, individual states that we are today. One might point out that although the Amar brothers were born in Michigan, their parents were born in India, so it’s indeed reasonably questionable as to whether they can fully understand the nature of our Western democratic American union of states. No doubt they’re nice guys, though.
The unspoken assertion is that today’s politicians are smarter and wiser than the Founding Fathers. John Carney, Delaware’s governor, is a very nice and bright guy; I first met him when he was Lt. Governor under RuthAnn Minner. But, in all honesty and with all due respect, Caeser Rodney and Benjamin Franklin will be remembered long after today’s politicians are forgotten. The Founding Fathers’ ideas have stood the test of time, and if the Constitution needs to be changed, or amended as described in Article V, let’s do it that way instead of sneaking around and pretending the Interstate Compact is a legitimate “solution” to a problem that isn’t there.
¹All Democrat-controlled states, plus the District of Columbia
*If Jefferson Davis and his friends had read Article I, §10, cl.1, it might have prevented a lot of unpleasantness from 1861 to 1865, but, I digress.
Let’s be honest, with ourselves and with each other, something the Democrat party couldn’t do if guns were put to their heads.