By Joseph J. Honick
Nevertheless, after much debate and a little revolution, they did manage to create something called the United States of America.
A problem, among many, was the challenge of how to accommodate all that equality so that all those “equal” men(again no women)could, as shareholders in the new nation, could vote for the leadership of this major new venture. Once again, they had to deal with the human element that insisted, while all “men” might be equal, not all states would be, and the bigger they were the more power they would have in determining who would run the big show. And the vehicle they came up with of course was the Electoral College — which promptly erased any sense that “ALL” men would be equal at the end of the election campaigns. It would be the electors in the larger states that would have the greater power to elect, even if the tally of all votes across all states might determine a different majority of popular expression.
The reasons given at the time for such an interesting arrangement was that the big boys of the big states were simply jealous of their status and did not think the folks in smaller places should have equal status even as individual voters, no matter what that silly Declaration of Independence might have said.
And thus a kind of election Ponzi Election scheme was born and has survived despite the challenges from some who had the chutzpah to suggest what we have flies in the face of that Declaration about all that equality.
The most recent expression that caused massive national turmoil was the 2000 campaign between George W. Bush and Al Gore, with Bush of course squeaking through with the electoral vote despite getting 143,893 fewer votes from just ordinary folks.
Over the years of this great nation, many changes have been made to the Constitution based on rules set for that in that very document to accommodate changing times and needs. But, save for the amendment protecting the right to keep and bar arms, no rule has been kept so sacrosanct as how the people would get the White House, except of course today a woman just might somehow get through.
The current campaign for that White House suggests we could again find America’s voters kept outside the dock while electors and their college control the results. It could be that close, especially given the turmoil confronting all states, large and small, massive unemployment while corporate CEO’s (according to theWall Street Journal) continue to reap multi-million dollar bonuses amid cries their corporations are struggling against governmental interference.
So why the term “Ponzi” attached to what is engrained in the Constitution? Simple: because what is promised to the people as a constitutional benefit (or share of ownership) is not delivered, and the investments of taxpayers are not protected as they thought they were….not so much different from the Ponzis, Madoffs, Enrons and a long list of others who said one thing and did the other.
In an earlier piece, I called election day “November Fools’ Day” in the hope the same kind of people who challenge excessive government in different areas would see the illogic that a lot of us do not have a real say in the final results. We’re simply a kind of poll results for others to figure out what to do. Perhaps the same opinion makers who make up the PR industry and are called on by nations, corporations, unions and other major factors to impact public opinion….perhaps they might also work to make all Americans as equal as the sacred Declaration of Independence declared us to be and so when it comes time to say whom we want to run the place, it will be the real majority that makes it happen. * * *
Joseph J. Honick is an international consultant to business and government and writes for many publications, includinghuntingtonnews.net.