The Washington Post

A plan for disaster

-

The July 21 news article “Bipartisan group of senators offers bill to clarify rules in presidenti­al vote” stated that “a state can appoint just one set of presidenti­al electors, and only the governor — or an official designated in the state’s constituti­on — could submit the electors to Congress.” Republican­s have laid the groundwork for this for years, from when they realized they couldn’t win elections on a popular vote. I suspect the “official designated in the state’s constituti­on” might well be the secretary of state, who, along with the governor, might have been selected and financed by the Republican Party. Is there a definition that determines which list is the one to be given to Congress? Can there be a few drafts before the final one is presented?

Ignoring the glaring errors (1) of not addressing voting rights and (2) that disputes might well end up in the Supreme Court, which gutted the Voting Rights Act in the first place, this is a recipe for another disaster.

The best way to help free and fair elections is paying for them with public money. It’s the biggest bang the public could get for its buck.

Another is doing away with the electoral college altogether. If that had been the case in 2000, the Supreme Court couldn’t have decided that the candidate who received fewer votes got the job. Maybe it’s the Supreme Court we should reform.

Cynthia La Covey, Arlington

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States