Who can really vote in elections?

Let’s continue this discussion On, “One Man, One Vote.”

As I go back about two hundred and fifty years ago, I try to consider what was important to the writers of the US Constitution and how they wanted to have it interpreted in the future, even today.

I’m sure that when they contemplated and interpreted their writings it would never have occurred to them that voting would ever become so complicated or that it would be influenced by so many and various influences that the voting apparatus has on it today. I’m somewhat sure that they automatically envisioned a voting situation where a person went to the poling place, probably alone, and there he marked his ballot with his pen or pencil, dropped it into a wooden box and left the place thoughtfully assured that his vote had all of the power, authority and significance that every other vote had. And I still believe that to be correct. However, I’m not so naive, nor do I run around with my head in a jar, nor do I wear rose-colored glasses. So, before we succumb to the notion that all is well in this world of Saints, let’s check the police records for our area and the country as a whole and when we do we will see that corruption is alive and well and is ever increasingly imaginative and creative. I hate to say this, but our world and country are as crooked as a snake and vile as a serpent, not just in the back alleys but in all forms of politics as well.

Unfortunately, starting in the days of grade school sports, we are taught that winning is everything, instead of the effort to win is everything. One leaves the door wide open for cheating, the other encourages excellence.

Now, let’s get back to “One Man, One Vote.” Of course, we all agree that this applies to women as well, without saying, even though not always.

You will find that in the origin of the voting process, it was not only the women that were excluded from the right to vote, the person without property was not allowed either. However, somewhere bound up in the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the US Constitution, it was determined, probably by the Supreme Court, but only a Student of Law could follow all of the incremental steps it took to get us to where we are.

So then, who can vote in US elections?

“Several constitutional amendments (the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth specifically) require that voting rights of U.S. citizens cannot be abridged on account of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, or age (18 and older); the Constitution as originally written did not establish any such rights.” And here we are today, all seems well, except, some are screaming to give non-citizens the right to vote. Is this crazy or what?

When I first began voting, I thought that voting was a Federal function. It was not until later, after I began paying attention to what voting was really about that I found out that voting was not a Federal thing but rather it is a State thing. Really? Yes it is. It was a Federal thing, but later, after the Constitution was settled on, the wise?? founders decided to put all voting under the guise and control of the individual States. In other words, we don’t actually vote for the President or other persons on the ballot, we vote for State Delegates to carry or choices to the Electoral College and there they are presented as those selected by the in-state votes for a certain person. So, as best I can understand, those persons seeking in-state positions are elected by in-state votes,

The following

Borrowed from “The Albuquerque Journal

“In December, five specially selected New Mexico Democrats will travel to Santa Fe, meet in a little room with the secretary of state and cast their votes for president of the United States.

It is this group that actually votes for the president — not the 800,528 state citizens who cast a ballot Nov. 8.

And they could vote for whomever they would like, although that would break state law.

This Electoral College process — set out in the Constitution — has in the past resulted in the selection of a president who came in second in the national vote.

That is almost certain to happen again this year, which would make it the fifth time in presidential history that the second-place finisher in the popular vote won the presidency.

As of Saturday, vote counts for nearly all states had yet to be finalized and certified, but many political watchers spent the week anticipating that Democrat Hillary Clinton’s popular vote would exceed President-elect Donald Trump’s by more than 1 million votes.

“It’s a complicated institution in some ways, and it’s one that emphasizes state interests over who wins the most votes,” said University of New Mexico professor Lonna Atkeson, who is also the director of the Center for the Study of Voting, Elections and Democracy. “It combines the number of people in each states’ delegation, the House plus Senate, and those are the number of electors in each state.”

So, New Mexico has five electors, who are selected by the political parties. The slate of electors from whichever party wins the popular vote in the state is the group that travels to Santa Fe in December to cast the state’s five presidential votes. No federal rules say that electors must vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in their state. But 25 states, including New Mexico, have laws that direct electors to vote in accordance with the state’s popular vote.

Here, any elector who votes for someone other than the presidential candidate of his or her party could face a fourth-degree felony charge.”

Next time, “One Man, One Vote” not all it seems.

That’s My Opinion