What Should Happen When Presidential Electors Fail To Provide Majority Support

 

If the Presidential electors fail to muster the majority support needed to choose the President, the Top Three elector vote getters are subject to selection by the House of Representatives.

If those same electors fail to muster the majority support needed to choose the Vice-President, the Top Two elector vote recipients are subject to selection by the U.S. Senate.

While obviously both the Presidential candidates(Top Three) should be selected by the U.S. Senate and the Vice-Presidential candidates(Top Two) should be selected by the House of Representatives, the purpose of this post is to explain why the Top Three Presidential candidates are subject to selection while only the Top Two VP candidates are subject to the same.

The President needs a mandate considering the considerable authority given to that office. That is why the winner of the Presidential race must get a majority of states, that the House Representatives select on behalf of, to choose him or her out of three candidates. The framers of the U.S. Constitution wanted the winner of the Presidential race to get more states to select him or her than the other two candidates combined in case the electors were unsuccessful in their choosing.

They wanted the President to win convincingly because of the authority that office wields. Since the Vice-President does not have nearly as much authority, these framers limited the selection of the Vice-President by the legislative body to the Top Two elector vote getters only. 

Cliff Notes Version: The reason why the Top Three Presidential candidates are chosen to be voted on by a federal legislative house, if the electors fail to choose the President, is because the elected President must win convincingly before he is awarded Presidential authority. The President, as head of the federal executive branch and as America's representative to other nations and foreign entities, is given much authority. Therefore, he must be selected by mandate by this certain legislative house. 

The Vice-President, on the other hand, has far less authority. Therefore a candidate just needs more members of a legislative body to cast votes for him or her than the other Vice-Presidential candidate. That certain legislative body choose the winner out of the Top Two electoral vote recipients for that position.

The Selection Of The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate

 

Non-members can apply to the US Senate if they are interested in those positions as President Pro Tempore and other officers provided that candidate is not a participant in any branch of government. They also have to meet other Constitutional Requirements.

Any candidate worthy of a vote by the Senate has to first receive at least 25% of Yay votes in the roll-call. The vote-worthy eligible candidates contest for each office. The candidate who receives the highest number of votes cast by the members of the Senate either becomes or remains the officers of the Senate.

These U.S. Senate officers do not have the authority to cast votes on legislation. This is important so these officers are not compromised in their responsibilities since they will not have a direct stake in the legislation. 

These Senate Officers are chosen by the House only when the President Of The Senate(Vice-President Of The United States) is absent. The President pro tempore of the Senate becomes the Acting Vice-President(President of the US Senate). The new President pro tempore is selected by the US Senate. 

Cliff Notes Version: Non-members of the US Senate should be chosen as officers of that legislative body. The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate can become either Active VP or Active President, depending on the situation.

Senate officers, chosen by the Senate, are only chosen and only exist during the absence of the Vice-President. 

The Senate is much more powerful and federal now than it was when the US Constitution was written. This is another reason why non-members should be chosen as officers, mainly the President pro tempore.

The Selection Of The Speaker Of The House Of Representatives

 

The Selection Of The Speaker Of The House Of Representatives-

[U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers.]

The U.S. Constitution does not require or ban House of Representatives members from serving as officers. It would make the most sense to allow only non-members to serve as Speaker and as other officers so that no member has more authority than another member. Non-members can apply to the House if they are interested in those positions as officers provided that candidate is not a participant in any branch of government. They also have to meet other Constitutional Requirements. 

Any candidate worthy of a vote by the House has to first receive at least 25% of Yay votes in the roll-call. The vote-worthy eligible candidates contest for each office. The candidate who receives the highest number of votes cast by the members of the House either becomes or remains the officer.

The officers, mainly the Speaker, does not have the authority to cast votes. This is important so these officers, mainly the Speaker, are not compromised in their responsibilities since they will not have a direct stake in the legislation. 

The Speaker and other officers should be full-time positions. The Speaker of the House Of Representatives has the same role and responsibilities as the Vice-President(President Of The U.S. Senate). The job of the Speaker is to organize that legislative body by scheduling speeches(i.e. filibusters), seminars, debates, and voting sessions. 

Cliff Notes Version: Non-members of the House of Representatives should be chosen as officers of that legislative body. The Speaker of the House of Representatives can become Active President.

These officers, chosen by the House members, are full-time positions. 

The House of Representatives is much more powerful and federal now than it was when the US Constitution was written. This is another reason why non-members should be chosen as officers, mainly the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

America has been a federal government-driven "Top-Down" society for 156 years- (A Harsha Sankar Letter)

 

The U.S Constitution is hardly followed. While it true I advocated for certain minor revisions, that is only because the governance now is different than it was back when it was written. Since the birth of the nation till the U.S. Civil War, America had "State-driven governance." The individual States were the controlling authority in providing the governance so long as they obeyed the core aspects of the U.S. Constitution, mainly the Bill Of Rights. The signers of the U.S. Constitution wrote that document with the intent of having that type of governance.

Since America's model of governance fundamentally changed after the Civil War, the changes I advocated only reflect that. The alterations I suggested reflect the fact that the federal government has been since 1865 and is currently the sovereign government authority.

Correctly or not, America has been a federal government-driven. "Top-Down" society for 156 years. Whether it is an improvement over the original governance is an individual's interpretation. It is neither more or less moral or principled. Rather, it is just another form on the Republic that the People seem to accept. 

Cliffnotes Version: Before the highly "bloody" American Civil War, America was similar to what the European Union is now.

Each state was a member-state in American nation. Each state has sovereignty over domestic matters as the federal government only concerned itself over international matters, such as tariffs. 

That changed after the War Between the States. The federal government then became the sovereign government authority. They then had the authority to pass legislation on domestic matters. Their laws were allowed to supersede state laws. 

America became a different Republic. The US Constitution should be changed to reflect that America's governance would be federally-centered.

The Selection Of The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate- Part Two (By Harsha Sankar)

 

The Selection Of The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate- Part Two

The passage of the U.S. Constitution regarding this position: 

[Article I, Section 3, Clause 5

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.] 

It is entirely possible the framers of the U.S. Constitution wanted the Senate to choose non-members of the Senate to serve as its officers and as President pro tempore. After all, the President of the Senate is not a member of the U.S. Senate. He is in fact the Vice-President of the United States. 

They knew that the U.S. Senate could not choose its own members to serve in these capacities. They believed this to be a blatant conflict of interest as that measure would give certain senators more authority than other senators would have. This obviously would erode Representative governance. 

Cliff Notes Version: Since the 17th Amendment allowed Senators to be elected by the People, the federal upper house became much more federal, much more political, and much more powerful.

Therefore, it is imperative that non-members of the Senate should be chosen by the Senate to be officers. Conflicts of interests need to be lessened.

The Selection Of The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate- Part One (By Harsha Sankar)

 

The Selection Of The President Pro Tempore of the US Senate- Part One

The passage of the U.S. Constitution regarding this position: 

[Article I, Section 3, Clause 5

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.] 

The US Constitution is clear and for good reason. The Senate can only choose their officers,including the President Pro Tempore, to serve only when the Vice-President is absent. Currently the U.S. Senate are choosing their officers on a permanent basis. This practice is not acceptable because it makes the U.S. Senate hierarchical and non-representative. For the Representative Republic Ideal to work, all senators must have equal amount of authority. It should be one Senator, one vote. All senators must have input on all matters. 

The US Constitution bans committees since they are used on a permanent basis. Committees are hierarchical in nature as they are led by chairpersons and ranking members. 

Cliff Notes Version: If Senate members are chosen as officers, the Senate becomes hierarchical and non-representative. It is important non-members be chosen as officers of that legislative body.

While the House Of Representatives became a little more political, a little more federal, and a little more powerful since the aftermath of the Civil War, the US Senate was fundamentally transformed. Instead of working under the consent and auspices of the federal legislature, the US Senate became an autonomous federal legislative body answerable to the People only.

Since they changed so much in scope, nature, and magnitude, it is imperative that their officers, mainly the President Pro Tempore, temporarily serve only when the Vice-President is absent. The Senate should not have officers serve when the VP(duly elected or acting) is normally serving.