'POTUS' stands for 'President of the United STATES'

The Electoral College has proven to be eminently FAIR.

To the Editor, Mother Jones: 

​Re:  Ari Berman's Article of April 4, 2024

I will not question Ari Berman’s plethora of partisan judgments (April 4) about this or that presidential candidate. But he treats our constitutional history like a discourse on how sausage is made. This distorts our picture of the American model of election and governance. 
 
At the top of Berman’s comments should come the “remarkable” Constitution, “...creating a strong central government and robust system of checks and balances that became a model for democracies across the globe. It prevented the country from sliding into anarchy, set up durable governing bodies, and restored elites’ faith in democracy...” I contend this track record hinges on the fact that “the Constitution is so difficult to revise.” 

'POTUS' is the CEO of the Federation of American STATES 
Here’s the big picture: POTUS stands for “President of the United STATES.” The only relevant “majority” in a presidential election is about electoral votes cast by the states. Acting as CEO, the President represents the states in matters that are primarily external to the states: trade deals and treaties, defense and warfare, border integrity, and running the Executive Branch.  No other office crosses borders and speaks for the whole. That’s why the presidential election process is unique.
 
The LA Times (7/14/23) reports that since World War II, the Electoral College has had a Democratic tilt nine times and a Republican one 10 times...”
 
The bi-partisan list of presidents who were elected with less than a majority of the popular vote, includes but is not limited to: Lincoln (1850), Hayes (1876), Garfield (1880), Cleveland (1884, 92), Wilson (1912, 16), Truman (1948), Kennedy (1960), Nixon (1968), Clinton (1992 and 1996), George W. Bush (2000), and Trump (2016).   “Share of electoral college and popular votes from each winning candidate, in all United States presidential elections from 1789 to 2020”  (Source, Statista.com)    In fact, this has been the case about 40 percent of the time since 1824.
 
And the cherry on the cake: In 1996 Bill Clinton got a smaller percentage of the popular vote (43%) than Donald Trump did in 2016 (46%). It was that dastardly Electoral College that handed Clinton the presidency. Twice.  (Source: Wikipedia.com)

The States are Sovereign Entitites and Comprise the US Federation 
Berman overlooks the essential matter of equity in the US Senate, as reflected in the Electoral College. Equity represents SOVEREIGNTY, the overarching principle of our Union of federated states, ensuring that all states have an equal voice in governance. Every state, whether Delaware or Texas, and all in between, is equally sovereign. That is, a law passed in Delaware applies to Delaware citizens to the same degree that a law passed in Texas applies to Texans. And if Delaware passes a law that Texans don’t like, Delaware doesn’t need to care. And if all 49 states disagree with Delaware’s law, Delaware’s sovereignty will have the last word. I guess that falls under Berman’s “determined minority.” Tell that to Delaware.
 
Let’s get real. The States are where people live. The States make up the Union. Contrary to “majority opinion,” safeguarding the Union was far and above the Founders' most pressing challenge. Sausage making.

The U.S. is NOT a Democracy and was Never Intended to be 
Sorry, folks, America is NOT a democracy ... the word does not appear in the Constitution. What we do find, in Article 4, Section 4, is this: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government...” Here’s what that means, according to two public resources:
 
1. Key Takeaways: Republic vs. Democracy   (Source: Thoughtco.com) 
·      Republics and democracies both provide a political system in which citizens are represented by elected officials who were sworn to protect their interests.

·      In a pure democracy, laws are made directly by the voting majority leaving the rights of the minority largely unprotected.

·      In a republic, laws are made by representatives chosen by the people and must comply with a constitution that specifically protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority.

·      The United States, a republic, is best described as a "representative democracy".
 “Founding Father James Madison may have best described the difference between a democracy and a republic: “It [the difference] is that in a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person: in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently, must be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region.”

Finally, “The constitutionally-granted power of the judicial branch to overturn laws made by the legislative branch illustrates the unique ability of a republic’s rule of law to protect the minority from a pure democracy’s rule of the masses.”
​
2. Next, from Democracy vs Republic  (Source: Diffen.com) 
“The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications for minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system — i.e., citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government. In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters.

In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.”

Small States are NOT Over-Represented
As Berman says, amending the Constitution is really hard. So why not update the questions we ask. For example: Is gerrymandering the exclusive work of conservatives? Tell that to New York. How many ethnic minorities of voting age own a mobile device? Then they possess the ID needed to vote.
About that (tired) idea that small states are over-represented: California’s 55 electoral votes are greater than the total electoral votes of the 12 smallest states scattered across the country, half of which are very liberal.

Finally, regarding the Supreme Court ruling on whether former President Trump could be removed from state ballots, it was none other than Sonia Sotomayor who wrote, “Federalism principles embedded in [the] constitutional structure decide this case. States cannot use their control over the ballot to undermine the National Government. That danger is even greater in the context of a Presidential election. State restrictions in that context implicate a uniquely important national interest extending beyond a state’s own borders.” 

 
Roberta Schlechter, former Legislative Saffer
Volunteer for Michigan-based KEEP OUR 50 STATES
Portland, OR 

---