Court's Decision Makes it Official: Electoral College is Meaningless

 The Constitution lost yesterday, and the Electoral College was taken yet further away from the way it was set up by the founding fathers.
  The Supreme Court ruled against "faithless electors," not allowing members of the Electoral College to vote for whomever they choose. You will argue that the electors should be obligated to vote for whom the voters tell them to. But, there are two things wrong with that thought: First, that isn't in the way it was set up by the Constitution. And, second, if electors are forced to vote for the state's popular-vote winner, that cancels out their ability -- should they ever decide to do it -- to translate the votes of the people for the second-leading candidate into a vote in the Electoral College. Grant it, the faithless Electors traditionally vote for whomever they will, not for the second-leading candidate. But, the Supreme Court ruling does, the same, prevent them from ever carrying the vote of the minority into the Electoral College if they were to decide to do that.
   So, what does the Constitution say? While Justice Elena Kagan, writing the court's opinion, says the Constitution grants "the electors themselves no rights," it does. It speaks of them casting their ballots and of them voting. That is enough. How is that not giving them the right to do just what it says, to vote? Yes, giving someone a "vote," is giving them the right to vote. The Constitution gave the electors the right to vote, and now the Supreme Court is taking that right away from them.
   "Each state shall appoint, in such a Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors," says the Constitution. It does not then go on to say the electors, once appointed, can be required by law to vote for any particular candidate. It does not bind their vote in any way.  It does not even suggest, insinuate, or indicate their votes shall not be their own.
   That concept, that you can vote, but you cannot just vote for anyone you want, is at odds with the very meaning of the word "vote." It may have been a practice of the old Soviet Union, but it doesn't work that way here in America.
   No, just to read it, you'd think the founding fathers actually intended for the electors to vote for whomever they wanted to, whomever they might choose. It's almost as if they wanted the Electoral College to mean something.
   Fancy that.
   Actually, if you think about it, why even have an Electoral College if you aren't going to let it do anything? Why take up all that space in the Constitution explaining how you want the Electoral College to function if you don't really mean for it to be a real thing, anyway?  I mean, do we really suppose the Electoral College was suppose to actually do something?
   The Supreme Court doesn't seem to think so. They've stripped it of its powers. Though, in practice, the Electoral College went the way of the tide long ago, the Supreme Court's decision seals it, makes it law as opposed to just practice.
   The founders went at length to describe how the Electoral College was to go about electing a president. No governing process is described in such detail as the process for using what we now call the Electoral College to elect a president. The Constitution takes the time to spell out how the members were to be picked, when they would be gathered to vote, how their votes would be transmitted to Congress, and when those votes would be counted. If the process meant so much to the fathers, how come we have come along to render it all a farce?  It wasn't long before we came along and put aside all their great effort. About the last vestige from the way it was suppose to function has been that occasionally "rogue" electors would rise up and vote for whomever they wanted to, regardless the instructions they were given on who to vote for. The "rogue electors," the "faithless electors," were the last vestige of the Electoral College operating the way it was set up. They were the last vestige of the Electoral College having any meaning.
   Well, now, even that last vestige is gone. We've taken a final step against the Electoral College. And, we've sealed everything over with our High Court, in effect, saying,  Abandoning the way the Constitution set it up, and doing it this way, instead, is a wonderful idea. So, let's just keep on keeping on, and be happy we don't have to do it the way the Constitution wanted us to. We hereby declare it the official law of the land. officially setting aside whatever small words the Constitution might have had on the matter. What, you would expect us to rule differently? Everyone in the country thinks the popular vote should be for the presidential candidates, themselves, as opposed to electing a group to make that decision for us.
   Alas, that is in effect what they are saying. And, alas, they are accurate on that last point. But, I will remain one who would like us to do the election the way the founding fathers intended it done. I just keep thinking, If this document truly was inspired, then let's do it the way the founders told us to do it.