Re: Who would take the President elects place

Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

On Nov 10, 7:28 am, Alan Lichtenstein <a...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I don't know about that, Josh. Electors are now pledged to vote for a
particular candidate on at least the first ballot. Voting for Obama and
Biden would insure the ticket is verified and the vote would then be
certified. Come election day, Obama would technically be sworn in, but
since dead, Biden, after being sworn in would then become president.

I do not believe the electors who are pledged have the right to go
against that pledge, in the states that require so. However, not all
states, as far as I know, require binding pledges for their electors,
and that may be the wild card.


21 states have laws to prevent electors from straying. However,
except in Michigan and Minnesota, these laws only punish the
electors. They do not change their faithless votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector#cite_note-0

Interesting. That muddies the waters, then doesn't it?

In this hypothetical, it is not clear if the electors are being
unfaithful because the candidate is dead. For one thing, is a dead
person qualified to be President?

The Constitution only requires we vote for electors. What the pledges are and what latitudes they have, IMHO, would be a matter of state law. It would appear that if the electors are pledged for a slate( as you know, we vote for president and vice-president together ), it would appear that the electors, having lost the first spot would at least want to make certain that the second choice becomes president, as was the intention when they were nominated. It would appear that this would preclude any constitutional arguments.

A case in point, while not necessarily exactly similar was when John Ashcroft lost to a dead man. The Democratic candidate passed away shortly before the election, and the vote was taken, and Ashcroft lost. The committee on vacancies then filled the vacancy with the deceased wife. But state laws provide for that with the committee on vacancies, while there is no national standard for president. Once could argue that the electors of a state constitute a committee on vacancies. If one accepts that argument, they could meet to 'elect' the vice-president elect as president.

That was the whole point of Greenfield's novel (he explores these
unresolved issues).

However, hypotheticals do make for interesting discussion.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: new study
    ... Calif Bill wrote: ... People do not vote for the President. ... And most states do not require the Electors to actually vote for the person picked by their electors. ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: Hey, Steve! (WAS: Re: Pumping Gas in Oregon)
    ... For those not of US origin, the US has had an electoral college to ... college can and does vote for whoever it wants. ... entire country are allowed to have a binding vote for US president. ... Citizens, dead people, and illegal immigrants vote for Electors who ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: How to prime kids to learn 3+ languages?
    ... select the president and vice president (and the first time they had ... Electors were not originally labeled with their faction, ... cast a vote that changed the outcome from winner-take-all of a state. ... It was not the first time that happened. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: BBC Pronunciation and the U.S. Elections
    ... When we vote for president we are actually voting ... That's who *we* vote for. ... three additional Electors). ... I seem to recall that in Illinois, when I was growing up, the voting ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: How to prime kids to learn 3+ languages?
    ... select the president and vice president (and the first time they had ... Electors were not originally labeled with their faction, ... cast a vote that changed the outcome from winner-take-all of a state. ... It was not the first time that happened. ...
    (sci.lang)