A couple of weeks ago, I suggested that Republican elites took advantage of the complexity of the electoral system to make objections to Joe Biden's election--they knew that they weren't going to be successful, but figured that they would appeal to "the base." One additional point that I didn't mention is that some of the complexity comes from the Constitution, which left the conduct of elections to the states, or more exactly, the state legislatures: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors." As many observers have remarked, Americans have a reverence for the Constitution--not the philosophy behind it, but the words. If something is in the Constitution, many people will think that it represents timeless wisdom. I think this is part of the reason that Republican elites have been so reluctant to accept that Joe Biden won. The objection that some decisions about voting rules (e. g. absentee ballots) were made by courts or by election officials may be a technicality to the average person, but if you believe we should follow the original text of the constitution, it seems like an important principle. Moreover, it raises the possibility that a state legislature could decide to appoint the electors in a different way--for example, if the Democrats win the vote in 2024, a Republican legislature could decide that it's going to go ahead and appoint Republican electors anyway.
This means that the Republican party has been able to drift away from support for democracy without really becoming authoritarian.
I don’t follow your argument here. Some feedback:
ReplyDelete“As many observers have remarked, Americans have a reverence for the Constitution--not the philosophy behind it, but the words.” I don’t know what “observers” you refer to, but the connotation in my opinion is misleading. The Constitution is literally the law of the land, so “the words” are vitally important. Regarding “the philosophy,” my personal opinion is that our Constitution’s form of governance is the best we have seen in the world to date. Maybe I’m making your point for you…. As an aside, I just wish our Federal Government were actually following the Constitution’s words in limiting Executive Branch authority; the Legislative Branch should be doing their job rather than delegating so much to the Executive Branch, and I still hold out hope that the Judicial Branch will consider cases that enable them to make that point and limit Executive Branch overreach. And frankly, a significant portion of the Executive Branch bureaucracy is assuming duties the constitution assigns to the states.
“The objection that some decisions about voting rules (e. g. absentee ballots) were made by courts or by election officials may be a technicality to the average person, but if you believe we should follow the original text of the constitution, it seems like an important principle,” implies that “e.g. absentee ballots” were not authorized by state legislatures. I can’t find any evidence that absentee ballot laws were not enacted or delegated by state legislatures, so I don’t see unconstitutional actions. I can see how some partisan actors might try to make that point, but as far as I can tell, those assertions are baseless.
I had a feeling that I hadn't explained myself very well. I will try again in the near future.
ReplyDelete