From: Scanman723@aol.com
Subject: Re: Electorial College
Date: 11/15/2000 9:34:40 AM
To: seance@lists.no-fi.com


In a message dated 11/15/00 11:54:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
mike@msbdesign.net writes that Chuck Colson writes:

> The scenes from Palm Beach, Florida -- crowds
> protesting in the streets, banners waving, lawyers
> shouting -- are beginning to look more like a banana
> republic than the world's most powerful nation. If
> this case is not quickly resolved, public confidence
> -- a fragile thing at best -- will be badly shaken.

This statement is not fact, but Chuck's opinion.  Chuck's opinion regarding 
banana republics does have some value though,  as he is a convicted felon for 
his part in the Watergate scandal, the most serious constitutional crisis the 
USA has faced since the Civil War, and the last time this nation looked 
anything remotely like a banana republic.
> 
> Among the casualties of this mind-boggling situation
> could well be the Electoral College. 

Good riddance.

> 
> But Americans need a civics lesson. This country was
> never intended to be direct democracy, nor was it
> intended that the president be elected by direct
> vote. And there was a very good reason for this, one
> that was greatly influenced by a Christian
> understanding of the form of government best
> reflecting biblical values.

It is debatable that a Calvinist understanding of what reflects biblical 
values is a Christian understanding.  It sounds more like Chuck wants us to 
have a Calvinist lesson rather than a civics lesson.

> 
> At the beginning, the Founders believed that ordered
> liberty could best be achieved not by pure democracy
> but by a republican form of government. The people
> would choose leaders who would in turn rule over us.
> And, powers would be balanced between the states and
> the federal government. So, to make this work, the
> senators were to be appointed by the states, and
> electors would be elected who would in turn choose
> our president.    
> 
> In a republican form of government, the senators and
> electors should be persons of noble character who can
> rise above the public passions of the moment and who
> act in the best interest of the nation.
> 
> (That leaves out both parties in this election)

I believe we had a civil war which should have settled the states' rights 
issue.  The change to a direct vote for Senator is a welcome change from the 
anachronistic appointments by individual states.  The latter smacked of the 
House of Lords.  Since most states will not allow their electors to vote 
their conscience, but rather mandate by law that they must vote for the 
winner of the election in their state, it seems a moot point to have the 
Electoral College.

> 
> John Calvin believed in the total depravity of man.
> So, he argued not only against the "divine rule of
> kings," but also direct democracy; people, no less
> than kings, were predisposed to sin. He advocated a
> republican form of government with representatives
> chosen to lead for us -- limited government, with
> powers balanced. This, he believed, would best meet
> biblical objectives.

We do have a republican form of government, but thankfully not the Calvinist 
brand.


> 
> The Electoral College is still important. It is an essential
> ingredient in a republican form of government where
> states preserve their individual political identities
> and power. It is certainly not an anachronism. And we
> must not let the Electoral College be sacrificed in
> the backlash to this extraordinary election.

Wrong.  The Electoral College is elitist at its core, and must be abolished.  
It should have been abolished years ago.  If it had, we would not still be 
waitng for a winner now.

> Taken fromChuck Colson at
> 
> http://www.breakpoint.org
> 
> Mike
> 
> 


Jack
"I am not a crook!"  Richard M. Nixon