Category: Government

  • ‪Can Electors Go Rogue? The “Faithless Elector”‬

    ‪Can Electors Go Rogue? The “Faithless Elector”‬

    An elector can vote against the popular vote of their state. This is known as being a “faithless elector.” Historically, however, this has been rare and has never changed the outcome of a presidential election.

    Who are the electors? They are chosen by the political parties in each state. They are often party loyalists, chosen to recognize their service.

    Are there rules against it? Yes, many states have laws that require electors to vote for the candidate they are pledged to. The Supreme Court has upheld these laws, allowing states to penalize or replace faithless electors. As of 2024, 38 states and D.C. have such laws.

    As of 2024, the following 12 states do not have any laws that bind electors to the popular vote winner or penalize them for being “faithless”:

    • Arkansas
    • Illinois
    • Iowa
    • Kansas
    • Louisiana
    • New Hampshire
    • New Jersey
    • New York
    • North Dakota
    • Rhode Island
    • Texas
    • West Virginia

    How often does it happen? It’s very infrequent. Out of over 23,000 electoral votes cast in U.S. history, only a small number have been faithless. The most significant number of faithless electors in a single election was in 1872, when a candidate died after the election but before the electors met.

    Of course. While faithless electors have never changed the outcome of a presidential election, there have been numerous instances of them throughout U.S. history.

    Here is a list of every faithless elector vote for a presidential candidate, broken down by election year.

    Instances of Faithless Electors by Election

    2016: This election had the most faithless electors in modern history.

    Pledged to Hillary Clinton (Democrats):

    In Washington, three electors voted for Colin Powell and one voted for Faith Spotted Eagle.

    In Hawaii, one elector voted for Bernie Sanders.

    An elector in Maine attempted to vote for Bernie Sanders, but was forced to change his vote to Clinton.

    Electors in Minnesota and Colorado also attempted to vote for other candidates but were replaced.

    Pledged to Donald Trump (Republicans):

    In Texas, two electors defected. One voted for John Kasich and the other for Ron Paul.

    2004: One Democratic elector from Minnesota, pledged to John Kerry, voted for John Edwards (Kerry’s running mate) for both president and vice president.

    2000: One Democratic elector from the District of Columbia, Barbara Lett-Simmons, abstained from voting for Al Gore as a protest for D.C.’s lack of congressional representation.

    1988: One Democratic elector from West Virginia, Margarette Leach, voted for Lloyd Bentsen (the vice-presidential candidate) for president and Michael Dukakis for vice president.

    1976: One Republican elector from Washington, Mike Padden, voted for Ronald Reagan instead of Gerald Ford.

    1972: One Republican elector from Virginia, Roger L. MacBride, voted for the Libertarian ticket of John Hospers and Tonie Nathan.

    1968: One Republican elector from North Carolina, Lloyd W. Bailey, voted for George Wallace of the American Independent Party instead of Richard Nixon.

    1960: One Republican elector from Oklahoma, Henry D. Irwin, voted for Virginia Senator Harry F. Byrd instead of Richard Nixon.

    1956: One Democratic elector from Alabama, W. F. Turner, voted for a local judge, Walter B. Jones, instead of Adlai Stevenson.

    1948: One Democratic elector from Tennessee, Preston Parks, voted for Strom Thurmond of the States’ Rights Democratic Party instead of Harry S. Truman.

    1912: Eight Republican electors voted for Nicholas Murray Butler for vice president instead of James S. Sherman, who had died before the electoral vote. This was a case of a candidate’s death, not a political protest.

    1896: Four People’s Party electors cast their vice-presidential votes for Thomas E. Watson instead of the Democratic nominee, Arthur Sewall.

    1872: This is the most significant case in terms of numbers. Horace Greeley, the Democratic/Liberal Republican candidate, died after the general election but before the Electoral College voted. As a result, 63 of the 66 electors pledged to him cast their votes for other individuals.

    1836: Twenty-three Democratic electors from Virginia refused to vote for Richard M. Johnson for vice president, who had been Martin Van Buren’s running mate.

    1796: Samuel Miles, a Federalist elector from Pennsylvania, voted for Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson instead of the Federalist candidate, John Adams. This was the first instance of a faithless elector.

    Sources:

    fairvote.org,latimes.com,thegreenpapers.com,wikipedia.org

  • The Autopen Republic: An Exposé on Legislative Negligence

    The Autopen Republic: An Exposé on Legislative Negligence

    The assertion that “no one has ever read an entire bill before voting on it” rings with a cynical truth that many Americans feel deep in their bones. It’s a damning indictment of a broken system. This isn’t about lofty ideals or the complexities of modern governance; it’s about a fundamental failure of duty. We demand proof of review, a guarantee that our laws are not passed by autopilot. The era of excuses is over.

    By the Numbers: A Crisis of Volume and Verbiage

    The sheer scale of legislation has become a convenient shield for lawmakers. But a look at the data reveals a problem that has spiraled out of control.

    • The Longest Bill: The record for the longest bill ever passed goes to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. At an obscene 5,593 pages, it was a behemoth spending bill combining COVID-19 relief with a $1.4 trillion omnibus package. To expect any single human to read, comprehend, and critically analyze this mountain of text before voting is a physical and cognitive impossibility. It was signed into law by President Trump on December 27, 2020, after passing both houses of Congress with large bipartisan majorities just days earlier.
    • The Shortest Bill: In stark contrast, some legislation can be very brief. In 2017, a bill was introduced in the House with a single sentence: “The Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate on December 31, 2018.” While this bill did not pass, it demonstrates that brevity can be a tool for radical change.
    • The “Average” Bill – A Rising Tide of Text: The very concept of an “average” bill is misleading, but the trend is undeniable. In the 1947-48 session, the average law was just 2.5 pages. Today, that average has ballooned to nearly 18 pages. More complex legislation often exceeds 1,000 pages. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, for example, clocked in at over 2,500 pages.
    (more…)
  • Healthcare Provisions Within the “Big Beautiful Bill”: Exacerbating Failed Policies

    The comprehensive legislation, dubbed by some the “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB), includes a substantial set of provisions pertaining to healthcare. These proposals aim to reform Medicaid, Medicare, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and other health-related sectors. However, rather than offering genuine solutions, these healthcare sections largely entrench and expand failed federal programs. Market-based and state-level solutions are the appropriate path forward; continuing with the current trajectory will only worsen our $37 trillion national debt and further degrade our healthcare system.

    Medicaid and CHIP: Entrenching a Failed System

    A significant portion of the bill addresses Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), programs that have demonstrably failed to deliver efficient, fiscally responsible healthcare.

    • Enrollment and Eligibility: Provisions imposing moratoriums on recent rules for Medicaid/CHIP enrollment (Sec. 44101, 44102), while citing concerns over states’ ability to remove ineligible enrollees, tinker at the edges of a fundamentally broken system. Robust income verification, streamlined through tax data, is essential, but this addresses symptoms, not the core disease of these programs. The argument that the delayed rules could weaken verification standards only underscores the inherent vulnerability to fraud and improper payments within these federal structures.
    • The mandate for states to improve enrollee address information and participate in a federal system to prevent multi-state enrollment by 2029 (Sec. 44103) is a minor, albeit logical, measure within a system that requires wholesale replacement.
    • Quarterly screenings against the Death Master File (Sec. 44104) and enhanced provider screening (Sec. 44105, 44106) are basic anti-fraud measures that should have been rigorously implemented decades ago, and their inclusion now highlights past failures.
    • Increasing eligibility redeterminations to every six months (Sec. 44108) will inevitably create more bureaucracy, not genuine integrity, within these failed expansion programs. Stringent initial enrollment criteria are necessary, but the programs themselves are the problem.
    • Proposed revisions to home equity limits for Medicaid long-term care (Sec. 44109) are an egregious component of a system that forces asset depletion. The link between Medicaid and long-term care services must be severed entirely.
    • Prohibiting Federal Financial Participation (FFP) for individuals without verified immigration status (Sec. 44110) is a necessary, though insufficient, step toward fiscal discipline.
    • Conversely, efforts to “streamline” enrollment for out-of-state providers (Sec. 44302) are a pathway to inefficient contracting and cronyism, typical of bloated federal programs.
    • Spending and Program Integrity:
    • The removal of the good faith waiver for certain erroneous excess Medicaid payments (Sec. 44107) is an admission of the rampant improper payments that plague the system, reinforcing the argument that Medicaid must be abolished.
    • Modifying retroactive Medicaid/CHIP coverage (Sec. 44122) is a trivial adjustment.
    • Federal intervention in pharmacy payments (Sec. 44123, 44124) is an unacceptable overreach. Free markets, not government dictates, ensure fair pharmacy pricing.
    • The prohibition of federal Medicaid/CHIP funding for gender transition procedures (Sec. 44125, Sec. 112030) is correct; such funding has no place at the federal level and should be entirely a private matter, with no exceptions for federal dollars.
    • Prohibiting federal payments to “prohibited entities” in family planning (Sec. 44126) is a sound policy; such funding decisions should be eliminated from public coffers altogether.
    • Sunsetting increased FMAP for new Medicaid expansion states (Sec. 44131) and imposing a moratorium on new provider taxes (Sec. 44132) are welcome, as no new taxes should support these failing programs.
    • Revising payments for state-directed Medicaid based on Medicare rates (Sec. 44133) perpetuates federal price-fixing. Medicaid must be dismantled, replaced by a system focused on transparently priced emergency and preventative services, potentially leveraging innovations like robotic-assisted procedures to reduce costs and liability.
    • Mandating Medicaid community engagement requirements (Sec. 44141) is a gross federal intrusion into matters that are exclusively state or local concerns.
    • Modifying cost-sharing for Medicaid expansion individuals (Sec. 44142) is merely propping up a failed expansion of a failed program using flawed metrics like the federal poverty line. The entire edifice needs to be replaced with free-market solutions.
    (more…)