ddl

The video I have linked below is a discussion of why the electoral college was so important to the founding fathers and why it is essential to a republic as opposed to a democracy. The electoral college empowers states as opposed to a central, federal government. Our country was founded on states rights. The founding fathers determined that the states, not the national populous, would elect the president. Each state determines how it will cast its electoral votes. The whole point was to give smaller states some additional power so they would not be dictated to by the bigger states. If it were not for this voting system it is not likely we would even have the republic we do because the smaller colonies were not about to let New York determine the elections. While the more populous states have more electoral college votes (each state gets a number of votes equal to its total number of senators and representatives) it is not so overwhelming a number as to disenfranchise the smaller states. For example I have done some arithmetic to show the percentage of votes both Alaska (the least populous) and California (the most populous) would have under each system. I am using rough 2010 census figures giving Alaska a population of 710,000, California 37,000,000, and the USA about 313,000,000. There are 538 total electoral votes. Alaska has 3 and California has 55. By popular vote: Alaska 710,000/313,000,000 = 0.23% California 37,000,000/313,000,000 = 11.94% Electoral college: Alaska 3/538 = 0.56% California 55/538 = 10.22% Alaska has more than twice as much "say" under the electoral system (.56% instead of .23%). California has a little less say under the electoral college system. California still has more clout than Alaska but at least not quite as much percentage-wise as it would in a democracy. http://www.youtube.c...h?v=RWoEVM9gkpY

No Legal Requirement Electors in these States are not bound by State Law to cast their vote for a specific candidate: ARIZONA - 10 Electoral Votes ARKANSAS - 6 Electoral Votes DELAWARE - 3 Electoral Votes GEORGIA - 15 Electoral Votes IDAHO - 4 Electoral Votes ILLINOIS - 21 Electoral Votes INDIANA - 11 Electoral Votes IOWA - 7 Electoral Votes KANSAS - 6 Electoral Votes KENTUCKY - 8 Electoral Votes LOUISIANA - 9 Electoral Votes MINNESOTA - 10 Electoral Votes MISSOURI - 11 Electoral Votes NEW HAMPSHIRE - 4 Electoral Votes NEW JERSEY - 15 Electoral Votes NEW YORK - 31 Electoral Votes NORTH DAKOTA - 3 Electoral Votes PENNSYLVANIA - 21 Electoral Votes RHODE ISLAND - 4 Electoral Votes SOUTH DAKOTA - 3 Electoral Votes TENNESSEE - 11 Electoral Votes TEXAS - 34 Electoral Votes UTAH - 5 Electoral Votes WEST VIRGINIA - 5 Electoral Votes Legal Requirements or Pledges Electors in these States are bound by State Law or by pledges to cast their vote for a specific candidate: ALABAMA - 9 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - § 17-19-2 ALASKA - 3 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - § 15.30.040; 15.30.070 CALIFORNIA - 55 Electoral Votes State Law - § 6906 COLORADO - 9 Electoral Votes State Law - § 1-4-304 CONNECTICUT - 7 Electoral Votes State Law § 9-175 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - 3 Electoral Votes DC Pledge / DC Law - § 1-1312(g) FLORIDA - 27 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - § 103.021(1) HAWAII - 4 Electoral Votes State Law - §§ 14-26 to 14-28 MAINE - 4 Electoral Votes State Law - § 805 MARYLAND - 10 Electoral Votes State Law - § 20-4 MASSACHUSETTS - 12 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - Ch. 53, § 8, Supp. MICHIGAN - 17 Electoral Votes State Law - §168.47 (Violation cancels vote and elector is replaced). MISSISSIPPI - 6 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - §23-15-785(3) MONTANA - 3 Electoral Votes State Law - §13-25-104 NEBRASKA - 5 Electoral Votes State Law - § 32-714 NEVADA - 5 Electoral Votes State Law - § 298.050 NEW MEXICO - 5 Electoral Votes State Law - § 1-15-5 to 1-15-9 (Violation is a fourth degree felony.) NORTH CAROLINA - 15 Electoral Votes State Law - § 163-212 (Violation cancels vote; elector is replaced and is subject to $500 fine.) OHIO - 20 Electoral Votes State Law - § 3505.40 OKLAHOMA - 7 Electoral Votes State Pledge / State Law - 26, §§ 10-102; 10-109 (Violation of oath is a misdemeanor, carrying a fine of up to $1000.) OREGON - 7 Electoral Votes State Pledge / State Law - § 248.355 SOUTH CAROLINA - 8 Electoral Votes State Pledge / State Law - § 7-19-80 (Replacement and criminal sanctions for violation.) VERMONT - 3 Electoral Votes State Law - title 17, § 2732 * VIRGINIA - 13 Electoral Votes State Law - § 24.1-162 (Virginia statute may be advisory - "Shall be expected" to vote for nominees.) WASHINGTON - 11 Electoral Votes Party Pledge / State Law - §§ 29.71.020, 29.71.040, Supp. ($1000 fine.) WISCONSIN - 10 Electoral Votes State Law - § 7.75 WYOMING - 3 Electoral Votes State Law - §§ 22-19-106; 22-19-108

Actually the electoral college has not voted yet. They won't vote until December 17th this year. "3 U.S.C. § 7 : US Code - Section 7: Meeting and vote of electors The electors of President and Vice President of each State shall meet and give their votes on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment at such place in each State as the legislature of such State shall direct." The states can still certify their final results which directs the electors in their voting. And despite the will of the people by their vote, not all electors are legally bound by the popular voting in their states.

I go with the Fair Tax. Former congressman John Linder co-authored The FairTax Book with radio talk show host Neal Boortz, which spent time atop the New York Times bestseller list.[4] The book discusses H.R.25, also known as the Fair Tax Act, which Linder sponsored. They released a follow up book FairTax: The Truth in 2008.[5] Linder first introduced the legislation in July 1999 to the 106th United States Congress. He has reintroduced substantially the same bill in each subsequent session of Congress. While the proposed bill has yet to have a major effect on the tax system, the Fair Tax Act has the highest number of cosponsors among tax reform proposals (attracting 76 in the 110th United States Congress),[6] gathering much stronger support than popular flat tax legislation. A number of congressional committees have heard testimony on the FairTax; however, it has not been voted on in either Chamber. The bill is cosponsored by former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, but has not received support from the Democratic leadership.[7] Matching legislation has been introduced into the Senate by Georgia Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss. The FairTax has generated a large grassroots tax reform movement in recent years, led by the non-partisan group Americans For Fair Taxation.[8]

I've studied dreams and dreaming for years. I've recorded dreams for years. Some have symbolic meaning, some have direct meaning, most we never understand. But don't ever think they are a bunch of hooey. They can sometimes be a way of tapping into a universal intelligence that we most often don't tap into in our waking hours.

Aside from psychologically, no one is any better off than they were before the traveler showed up. There's no increase in wealth to the community or to anyone in it. They all were $100 creditors and debtors and they've just cleared the books, not changed anyone's real situation.