[EM] Electoral College

[Michael Poole]

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax writes:

> At 10:13 PM 5/15/2006, Bob Richard wrote:
> >I will go one step further than Steve Eppley does below, and predict
> >that the Supreme Court would rule this particular compact
> >unconsititutional in spite of the very learned arguments presented at
> >www.every-vote-equal.com.  I think the current court would rule that,
> >although interstate compacts can be used for many things, they cannot be
> >used to alter the structure of government as established in the
> >Constitution.  I'm not sure I believe this argument myself.
> 
> Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, I would have thought that 
> the Court was above making blatant result-oriented decisions about 
> political process.
> 
> But I learned, in late 2000, that it could. So I can't say that Mr. 
> Richard is wrong.
> 
> However, it would be even more blatant, and "more blatant" could end 
> up getting some Justices impeached.

Rational arguments over the merits of any particular reform are a lot
easier to analyze when divorced from political rants and other
"religious" topics.  Would it be unreasonable for posters to do that
rather than expecting readers to do it -- or, more likely, understand
that readers might ignore the politically ranty post wholesale?

Michael Poole