“It takes a lot of courage”: Readers respond to Colorado’s Electoral College member

“It takes a lot of courage”: Readers respond to Colorado’s Electoral College member

 

Readers had a lot to say about “Colorado Springs Match Teacher + Electoral College = Rebellion,” published Tuesday evening. The story is about Bob Nemanich, a 59-year-old local math teacher who is one of 538 members of the Electoral College. On Dec. 19, he and the other 537 electors are scheduled to cast their ballots for president as part of the formal process of electing Donald J. Trump.

But what if they don’t? What if they revolt? Already, some dissenting members of the Electoral College, dubbed “Hamilton’s Electors,” are looking for a way to come together and perhaps choose someone else. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, “The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

The framers designed the Electoral College as a fail-safe against direct democracy, which they did not trust.

Nemanich is one of the national electors weighing his options. State law says he has to write in Hillary Clinton’s name because she carried Colorado. But he’s spoken to a lawyer and he believes decisions by the U.S. Constitution afford him the ability to vote for whomever he wants, or to become what is known as a “faithless elector.”

We at The Indy want to keep this conversation going. Here is a sampling of readers’ observations about Nemanich’s struggle with how he might vote.

It takes a lot of courage for an individual to come forward asking questions and contemplating this role in history. I applaud him. — Russ Breakstone Crees

He needs to cast his vote for Clinton — she won our state and he is a Democrat. — Liz Hershberger

If this country does not reform the Electoral College system, why shouldn’t California BOLT? The people of Wyoming carry much more clout with their 3 electors (1 vote per 194,000 people) than the people of California do with their 53 electors (1 vote for every 705,000). With an amendment to the constitution, the number of electors could be adjusted for population disparities. What’s wrong with having one Congressional seat in each state for every 600,000 people? That would add roughly 100 seats in Congress. Nine or ten of those new seats would go to California. The threat of California, Oregon and Washington leaving the U.S. is reason enough for other states to take this proposal seriously. Oregon and Washington would each pick-up one or two seats in Congress if the same numbers proposed were plugged-in. It is time to get serious about this. — Pete Simon

He’s a smart guy. Hillary Clinton took Colorado so it’s clear. I’m sure he won’t change his vote to an “also ran”. — TJ Tom Hittle

I don’t want Clinton any more than I want Trump. — Carrie Peterson

Electoral system needs to be abolished…John Andrusyk 

Vote like you are supposed to, it is not your choice to make. If you can’t do that then remove yourself from the process.Roy Forgy 

Remember that we’re in a plutocracy already regardless of certain people poo pooing the Princeton study. — Roberta Richardson 

Those who keep faith with Hamilton’s proposition that Electors ensure that “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications,” cannot be called a “faithless” elector. They should be acknowledged as keeping a higher faith. — Jim Towle

 

Like this story? Steal it! Feel free to republish it in part or in full, just please give credit to The Colorado Independent and add a link to the original.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.



About the Author

Corey Hutchins

is a journalist in Colorado, and Columbia Journalism Review's Rocky Mountain correspondent for the United States Project. Follow him on Twitter @CoreyHutchins and email him at CoreyHutchins [at] gmail [dot] com.

4 Comments

  1. FIN Denver on said:

    Come on! Come ooooon Hamilton Electors! Come on all of you fence-riding National Electors!!!! Come ooooon Americans!! It’s already clear that you are justified to act as those founders intended!!!!! Set a precedent! Take history by the trachea and squeeeeeze!

    Every DJT appointment is a 911 for we the people who depend on social justice and fear that domestic tranquility will further erode under the exacerbation of income inequality. The general welfare and the blessings of liberty—economic liberty—are in your hands. Revolt!

    We allllll depend on you. Red and blue, to deliver us from the erosion of our predictable livelihoods.

    2,000,000 more popular votes for HRC says you are justified to revolt.

    Civil rights in the cross hairs says you are right to revolt.

    An infrastructure plan which will probably give us more toll roads as contractors pocket bundles says you are right to revolt.

    Our public schools overseen by a Christian privatizer– because we know that reform really means privatize–.you are justified to revolt!

    A VP who is the point man, cuz the P “in an eminent degree [is hardly] endowed with the requisite qualification,” says you are right to revolt!

    A campaign that was divisive will become an administration that further divides the people, says you are right to revolt.

    Come oooooooon. I’ll pay the fine for you.

  2. We the People on said:

    No 538! No 538! Let’s go with popular vote totals. 538 people should not be allowed to vote for an entire nation that calls itself a democracy. We are better than trump, unless we have sunk to his levels. No. We are better than trump.

  3. Voice of Sanity on said:

    Colorado electors cannot keep Trump out of the White House. Only electors from states carried by Trump can keep him out of office. Every Colorado (and other “blue state”) elector who switches their vote to some theoretical Republican, will only reduce Clinton’s electoral total, compared to Trump’s. When this happens, Trump will declare that even blue state electors “couldn’t bring themselves to vote for crooked Hillary.” He will point to your electors’ actions as one more justification for every destructive policy of his Presidency. Alexander Hamilton would certainly not agree with the decision of Colorado’s “Hamilton electors” to provide Trump with even more ammunition to use against the American people.

Leave a Response

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>