CNN Election Results Filed As Exhibits In Greens
”Democratizing the Electoral College” Lawsuit.
- CNN Election Results are presented in the US District Court in Gordon vs Cheney to effect proportionate apportionment of presidential electors in Unbounded Southern States.
- Vice President Richard B. Cheney has filed a personal “Notice of Substitution of Counsel” with the Court dismissing the DOJ attorney assigned to him in Gordon vs Cheney.
WASHINGTON, DC 12/21/2008 – CNN ElectionCenter2008 web site reports on the 2008 Presidential Election results are now Exhibits in support of a Motion for Summary Judgment in the Green Civil Action to “Democratize the Electoral College“.
”The true measure of a democracy is not in counting how many votes are cast, but in how many of those votes that are cast truly count. ” declared Plaintiff Asa Gordon, in his introduction to the CNN Election Results exhibits.
A civil action to protect the voting rights of presidential electors and the voters they represent was filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia (1:08-cv-01294) on July 28, 2008, by Asa Gordon, chair of the DC Statehood Green Party’s Electoral College Task Force and executive director of the Douglass Institute of Government (http://www.electors.us.)
Two exhibits in the form of election tables are presented in the civil action that are derived from CNN Election results for the Dates of Nov. 6th and Nov. 20th.
Exhibit A Illustrates the Bias in the Allocation of Presidential Electors. The pleading before the court argues that:
”Barack Obama’s election is both an historic realization of our egalitarian ideals and an ironic testament to our enduring undemocratic legacy. The wide disparity between Obama’s popular vote majority and the percentage gap in his lead in the electoral college highlights the undemocratic bias inherent in the nation’s “Winner-Take-All” allocation of presidential electors. Obama leads McCain by 53% to 47% in the popular vote, but under “Winner-Take-All” rules, this 6% margin of victory translates into an exaggerated allocation of 364 to 174 electors, with a distorted 36% majority of electors awarded to Obama in the electoral college. A table of votes cast by states reveals a striking comparison between the “Winner-Take -All” method and the proportional apportionment of presidential electors predicated on the popular vote split. This more democratic method would result in an electoral count of 286 to 252, with a percentage electoral advantage of 53% to 47% that matches Obama’s popular vote majority. See Exhibit A_Table: Apportionment of Presidential Electors”
Exhibit B, is a table of Winner Take All vs Proportional Allocation of Presidential Electors for the Unbounded Southern States and is presented in support of a motion for Summary Judgment as a Matter of Law. In this instance the pleading argues that :
” Under the rule of Winner Take All McCain is awarded all of the 75 Presidential electors allocated to these States, i.e. 100%. Under the more democratic rule of proportionate apportionment, Obama would be allocated 33 presidential electors i.e. ~ 44% of the total electors. This is consistent with Obama’s 44% portion of the total popular votes cast in these states. Under the Winner Take All rule nearly 8 million votes that are cast in these states for presidential electors pledged to the democratic candidate Obama are not counted for participation in the electoral college. Absent a proportional apportionment of presidential electors for the Unbounded Southern States, the fourteenth amendment ’s mal-apportionment penalty presents a de jure mandate for “reduction of representation” (2U.S.C.§6) of: Arkansas-2; Georgia-7; Louisiana-4; Tennessee-5; and Texas-15. The Defendant’s exclusive selection of only majority polled presidential electors from the aforementioned Unbounded Southern States constitutes an abridgment of voting rights for minority polled presidential electors in violation of the mal-apportionment penalty clause pursuant to the United States Constitution (Amend. XIV§2) and statutory Code (2U.S.C.§6)”.
Gordon concludes the pleading with the argument that the ” exhibits within the context of the clear text of the governing United States Code (2USC§6) manifests that a summary judgment for a court order for proportional apportionment of presidential electors for Unbounded Southern States is warranted in this action”.
In another development, RICHARD B. CHENEY Vice President of the United States has dismissed the US attorney assigned to him by the Department of Justice(DOJ). Cheney has filed (Oct. 28th) with the United States District Court a “Notice of Substitution of Counsel” to detail a current Legislative Attorney (Yule Kim) at the Congressional Research Service(CRS) United States Constitution Division to the DOJ as a “Special Assistant United States Attorney” to the DOJ to represent him in GORDON vs CHENEY.
“This is the most amazing proposition that has ever been brought forward … and it will, and if it is accurate it could change the whole outcome of the voting process in the United States, and we will take that under consideration … we, we eagerly embrace your suggestion.”
_ Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Dec. 8th, 2004, Congressional Hearings on Ohio Voting
