Saturday, April 30, 2016

on Leave a Comment

One Man, One Vote?

          First, "One Man, One Vote"  was changed to "One Person, One Vote" because it was deemed sexist. Around the world this phrase was used in the suffrage movement. Surveys taken on college campuses, over the years,  have used this suffrage word to show that most people will take a stand based on what they think something means; without getting enough information to make an informed decision. This is deemed to be emotionalism over logic. The surveyor would, while looking very official and sincere, ask "are you in favor of women's suffrage?". Invariably, the person being questioned would jump to the conclusion that suffrage meant suffering, and would answer no. This shows the mindset of the "low informed voter".

          Full Definition of suffrage

1:  a short intercessory prayer usually in a series
2:  a vote given in deciding a controverted question or electing a person for an office or trust
3:  the right of voting :  franchise; also :  the exercise of such right[1]

          ""One man, one vote" (or "one person, one vote") is a name that has been used in many parts of the world where campaigns have arisen for universal suffrage. During the 20th-century period of decolonization and the struggles for national sovereignty, from the late 1940s onwards this phrase became widely used in less developed countries where majority populations were seeking to gain political power in proportion to their numbers.
The phrase was used in this form in an important legal ruling in the United States related to voting rights; applying the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution, the Supreme Court majority opinion in Reynolds v. Sims (1964) ruled that state legislatures needed to redistrict in order to have congressional districts with roughly equal represented populations. In addition, the court ruled that both houses of state legislatures needed to have representation based on districts containing roughly equal populations, with redistricting as needed after censuses."[2]

          Now, back to the original intention of this paper.  The way this country was set up, originally, was not even close to "one man, one vote". "one man, one vote" is what a democracy has. Our nation, however, is not a democracy. Our nation is a republic. A republic is where  the people elect representatives to vote on issues, in their stead, in the legislature.  In the beginning of our country, only men could vote, and that was based on several factors. In order to vote you had to own land and be an adult male. This, I believe, was meant to insure that each family had a say and had something to loose if they voted 'wrongly'. Only those who had "skin in the game" were worthy, because they would vote to protect what they had. Most states and municipalities also had restrictions that only Christian men could run for office. In reality, by the founding fathers, these restrictions, of letting only those who had something to loose and were familiar with the Judeo Christian foundations of the nation would insure the continuance of the freedoms of the nation.


          Elections were held for local and state offices, local and state legislatures and representatives for the national congress, but not for the national senate. Senators were elected by the state legislators, to represent the interests of that state in the national government. The senators would be beholden to the their state's interests.
          "The Voting Rights Act, signed into law on August 6, 1965, aimed to overcome legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African Americans from exercising their right to vote under the 15th Amendment (1870) to the Constitution of the United States."[3]
          After the U.S. Civil War (1861-65), the 15th Amendment, ratified in 1870, prohibited states from denying a male citizen the right to vote based on “race, color or previous condition of servitude.” Nevertheless, in the ensuing decades, various discriminatory practices were used, by the states, to prevent African Americans, particularly those in the South, from exercising their right to vote.
          During the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, voting rights activists in the South were subjected to various forms of mistreatment and violence.[4]
          From this we can see that black people legally participated in the electoral process, from the beginning of our country until the democrats took away that right from1870 thru 1965. It is truly amazing that it was the Republicans that fought for black peoples rights and invariably the Democrats have taken credit for the advances the Republicans fought for.
First Person of African Ancestry Elected to a Public Office in British North America: Matthias de Souza, Colonial Maryland Legislature, 1641-1642
First Person of African Ancestry Elected to a State Office in the United States: Alexander Twilight, Vermont Legislature, 1836-1837
Federal officials -
President of the United States: Barack Obama, 2009-2016
United States Senate: Hiram Rhodes Revels, Mississippi, 1870-1871
United States House of Representatives: John Willis Menard, Louisiana, 1868
Governors: Pickney Benton Stewart Pinchback, Louisiana, 1872-1873 (Acting Governor) 
L. Douglas Wilder, Virginia, 1990-1994 
Deval Patrick, Massachusetts, 2004-- 
David Paterson, New York, 2008-2010[5]

          The women of our country were not able to vote until 1920.  'Ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution granted American women the right to vote—a right known as woman suffrage. At the time the U.S. was founded, its female citizens did not share all of the same rights as men, including the right to vote.'[6] It is painfully significant to me that the priority to free the slaves was ahead of woman's suffrage. Both things should have been written onto the original Bill of Rights.

Local and municipal elected offices held by women-

Chief of the Cherokee Nation: Wilma Mankiller (1985) 

State elected offices-

State House of Representatives: Carrie C. Holly, Clara Cressingham, and Frances Klock (1894)

National offices-

          Most of our voting citizens have no real idea of the electoral process. In street interviews, a majority of people can't tell you who the president, the vice president, the speaker of the house, and most up setting, they don't know their local representatives. If they are confronted with the same kind of questions about rock stars and movie stars, they are better informed. These are the same people who voted for people they don't know by name or what they look like. They have been labeled "low information voters", and they determine your future just as much as you do. What percentage of our founding citizens wouldn't know who George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were?

          In our election process for president, every legal voter casts a vote for his or her choice, in their respective state. This determines who sits in the electoral college. The electoral college then determines the outcome of the election process. Oh, you thought the president was elected by the people? If this was a democracy, Al Gore would have been president. Thank the Lord that the founders had the good sense to make this a republic.

          What is the process in the primary elections, which determines who is allowed to run for president? Private, non governmental, businesses, such as the Republican National Committee and Democrat National Committee, hold primary elections that are funded by tax dollars. Why tax money is used to conduct the business of private entities is confusing to me. Perhaps, next we will use tax dollars to pay for the board meetings to elect the officers of Walmart and Subway. Once again, we see that the people think they are electing the candidates. when in reality it is the elites in control of the political parties. I have been saying, since the 80's that the people who are running for office were hand picked by those who are in financial control of the country. Yes, I do know that sounds like I am a conspiratist[8]. This would include the Council on Foreign Relations, the Illuminati, The Bilderbergers and others. "Starting with the 1796 election, Congressional party or a state legislature party caucus selected the party's presidential candidates. Before 1820, Democrat and Republican members of Congress would nominate a single candidate from their party. That system collapsed in 1824, and since 1832 the preferred mechanism for nomination has been a national convention."[9] The national conventions are run by private businesses, known as political parties. I certainly hope that our tax dollars are not used for these conventions.

          OK, now we can see that the time has come for a national rebellion, by the citizens of the United States. We need to establish a process to pick candidates that is not controlled by private businesses and funded by tax dollars. If our tax dollars were not available for the political process, perhaps those picking the candidates would be answerable to the American people; at least to the extent that they wish to raise money. Yes, I do agree that the funding processes need to be looked at, so people like George Soros and the Koch brothers can't dominate the process.

        Does it make sense to anyone to allow someone to vote without proving who they are, and have the eligibility to vote? Photo ID's are available at little or no cost. Drivers licenses qualify as well as other forms of picture identity such as DMV identity cards. You must have a picture ID to: fly, buy alcohol, buy cigarettes, open a bank account, apply for food stamps, apply for welfare,  apply for Medicaid/Social Security, apply for unemployment or a job, rent or buy a house, apply for a mortgage, to buy/rent a car, get a marriage license, buy a gun, adopt a pet, check in at a hotel or motel, apply for a hunting or fishing license, purchase certain cold medicines, and more.

          Probably the most important thing to remember about elections is that NO ONE gets to be in power unless God wills it. Daniel 2:21 says: "And he changes the times and the seasons: he removes kings, and sets up kings: he gives wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:" God has the right, and the power, to put people into governmental power to either help a nation or to punish it. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."[10] That is why the United States was established as a Christian Nation. Yes, that statement is easily provable.

[2] Wikipedia
[8] This is a word I invented, just like I invented the word Christophobia
[10] Romans 13:1


Post a Comment