The Electoral College: A call to duty

Sometimes there are critical crossroads in history. The election of 2016 is one.  

The Founders wanted to consider the sense of the people in the selection of the president, however they were concerned about unfettered democracy. Thus, they created the Electoral College system.

{mosads}Its functions included calm deliberation to protect against foreign interference in elections, the election of a person without the requisite character, or a tyrant empowered by charismatic manipulation.

The Electoral College would be acting consistent with its legitimate function if, after due deliberation, it decided to put principle ahead of procedure and party and to not award the presidency to Donald Trump when it votes for president on Dec. 19.

The peaceful transition of power is important to a democracy, but it does not mean passively accepting the result of an election tainted by foreign intrigue that risks destroying the democracy’s foundations.

The words of Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Paper 68 of 1788 are evidence of the intent of the Electoral system and its applicability to this election: Protection against foreign intrigue: “[As an]obstacle [that] should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption … chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?”

This election is clearly tainted by foreign intrigue and influence. The foreign entities, Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, with their release of illegally hacked documents, had a major effect on the election even if Russians didn’t do the hacking. 

Isn’t it bad policy to let them get away with influencing our election? If it succeeds this time, won’t it continue?

To ensure requisite qualifications according to the Federalist Paper, “The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.

“Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors . . . ; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States.”

Trump clearly manifests the “Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” that the Electoral College system sought to guard against. Now, with social media, their influence is more pervasive than in 1788.

So it is even more critically important that the electors “acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice” consider character, realizing that charisma and force of personality can influence voters to make regrettable choices in the heat of passion.

The president-elect is behaving better now than he was during the campaign. Was he misleading us then or now? We won’t know who he really is until after his inauguration.

If he is so inclined, the civil unrest that might follow his inauguration could give him justification for a declaration of a state of emergency and martial law and consolidation of power and suspension of normal government. Many dictators have thus seized power.

In recent news, a Russian official says they were in touch with Trump’s campaign. His campaign denies this. Another recent news story says that Trump may be reaching out to right-wing extremists in Europe.

This raises the possibility that once in power he may influence elections in countries like France in extremist directions like dominoes, gutting the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the process.  

There should be immediate and expedited investigation of WikiLeaks’s information release and possible Russian influence through computer intrusion and campaign contacts (and alleged FBI Hatch Act violation) and whether those events unduly influenced the election. The facts ascertained should be publicly released to give the Electoral College basis on which to exercise its judgment.

Further, our political leaders should speak out to encourage the Electoral College, if it so finds, fulfill its legitimate Constitutional duty of protector against foreign influence, tainted elections, and possible charismatic tyranny which threaten our American system of democratic government.