More on My Electoral College Duties

As promised in my last entry here's the process of my becoming a Presidential Elector. It started in early September when the California Democratic Party contacted all Democratic congressional representatives and nominated candidates, advising them of their responsibility to nominate members to the Electoral College. Louie Campos, Democratic congressional nominee in the state's 22nd Congressional District, thought it over and decided to ask me. Here's his description as reported in my last blog. Louie phoned me in mid-September and asked if I would do it. I responded that I would consider it a tremendous honor and would gladly accept his nomination. Although I strongly feel the president should be elected by popular vote and the Electoral College should be abolished, this is the system delineated in the Constitution and the way presidents have and will continue to be elected until that system is changed.

Louie got me a form to fill out with my basic personal information that he would need to send to the state party office in Sacramento. He said he needed it back by the end of the month. I took care of that easily enough and got it back to Louie to turn in. He told me the party officials wanted to make sure I could be counted on to support the Clinton-Kaine ticket with my electoral vote if they won California as expected, and he told them they had nothing to worry about. Indeed, I have been a loyal supporter and was looking forward to being a part of history by helping to elect America's first woman president.

On October 13 I got an email from Kasey Walukones with the state party in Sacramento. It was to inform all Electoral College Board Members of the particulars. The meeting will be held Monday, December 19 in the State Assembly Chamber in the California State Capitol Building. Electors do not get paid, though the State will reimburse us ten cents a mile for round trip mileage. Google Maps says it's 212 miles one way, so I should get $42.40 reimbursement for the round trip. We are permitted to invite two guests who can watch from the galleries above the Assembly Chamber. I've invited my wife Joan and Louie Campos. The three of us have decided to stay at a hotel overnight the night before to make sure we avoid any last-minute problems. The Electors will check in between 10:00 a.m. and noon in the Governor's Council Room. There we will get our credentials and guest passes.  At 1:00 we will have a private meeting, no doubt to go over the protocols. Then we will proceed to the Assembly Chamber at 1:30. At 2:00 the Electoral College meeting itself will begin. 

I got a second email from Kasey on October 24 reminding everyone of the arrangements and asking for the names of our guests. A third email from Kasey came on November 14, expressing regret over the election result but reminding California Electors that the meeting would still be held to elect Clinton and Kaine, the winners of California, to receive its Electoral Votes, and asking everyone to reply and confirm they were still coming.

People have been asking me if it's possible the Electoral College might reverse the national election outcome. While it is theoretically possible that Electors could vote their conscience against the will of the voters of their state, in practical terms the chances of that are zero. Just as here in California, the people chosen to fill the role of Electors are chosen under the supervision of the parties themselves, and are selected on the basis of their being considered loyal supporters of their party's candidate. When the voters of each state make their choices, they are electing the slate of Electors chosen by that candidate's party in the state. Whoever wins the state's popular vote is pretty much guaranteed to win all the state's Electoral Votes, other than in the two states (Nebraska and Maine) where Electors are elected according congressional district. And in those states, you can strongly count on the Electors to back the winner of the congressional district they were selected to represent. An Elector who casts a vote against the winner of their state is called a "faithless Elector." There was one in 2004, when a Minnesota Elector cast a vote for running mate John Edwards for President, rather than the leader of the ticket, John Kerry. The same ballot had John Edwards named for Vice President, so the presidential vote is thought to have been a mistake rather than intentional. The last time there was more than one nationwide was back in 1912, when the losing Republican candidate for Vice President died before the Electors met. A majority of states (including California) have passed laws requiring their Electors to follow the vote of the state's citizens, so such a vote would invite a legal challenge and perhaps even a constitutional ruling. Needless to say, there will be no such drama from me!

I'll fill you in on the event itself after December 19.