80TH CONGRESS 2d Session } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { REPORT No. 1614 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL SERIES OF STAMPS COMMEMORATIVE OF THE ONE-HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOUNDING OF THE AMERICAN TURNERS SOCIETY IN THE UNITED STATES MARCH 25, 1948.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. YOUNGBLOOD, from the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. J. Res. 340] The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, to whom was referred the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 340) to authorize the issuance of a special series of stamps commemorative of the one-hundredth anniversary of the founding of the American Turners Society in the United States, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the joint resolution do pass. STATEMENT It is the purpose of this measure to authorize and direct the Postmaster General to issue during 1948 a special series of 3-cent postage stamps commemorating the one-hundredth anniversary of the American Turners. This society sponsored physical education and recreation in America. It is generally recognized as the founder of physical education in our school systems. The nucleus of the American Turners Society was founded in 1848 during which year "Turnvereins" were founded in Cincinnati and New York. In view of the important part the Turners Society of the United States has played in the health and well-being of its citizens, the committee feels that a stamp commemorating its founding is warranted. 80TH CONGRESS 2d Session } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { REPORT No. 1615 PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OF PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT MARCH 26, 1948.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. REED of Illinois, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. J. Res. 9] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 9) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing for the election of President and Vice President, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the joint resolution do pass. GENERAL STATEMENT This resolution was reported without a dissenting vote. The same resolution was reported from committees in the Seventy-second and in the Seventy-third Congresses without a dissenting vote. In short and in substance this proposed amendment would (1) abolish our fictitious electoral college, (2) abolish electors, (3) provide for direct voting for President and Vice President, and (4) retain the electoral vote of each State as at present, but provide that such. electoral vote be divided in exact ratio with the popular vote. The greatest and most important office in the world is that of the President of the United States. The method through which we elect a President should be fair, honest, accurate, certain, and democratic. Our present system is not fair, honest, accurate, certain, or democratic. The proposed amendment would substantially meet the test of fairness, honesty, accuracy, certainty, and democracy. The founding fathers, during the constitutional debates, suggested numerous methods for electing a President. They agreed on several methods and then reversed their action. Finally, they wrote the electoralcollege system into the Constitution wholly by way of compromise. A great majority of them doubtless had serious misgivings as to the system devised. At no time has it ever functioned as they anticipated. Political scientists and informed students of government are practically unanimous in condemning our present electoral-college system as being dangerous, unworkable, and undemocratic. Some of the more obvious defects and evils of our present system are set forth as follows. EVILS OF PRESENT SYSTEM First, existing provisions as to the choosing of electors, the time and manner in which their votes are cast and counted, and the deciding of elections in the Congress is indefinite, uncertain, and is an open invitation to fraud and chicanery. In 1796, in our very first contested Presidential campaign, three electors who were chosen to vote for Mr. Jefferson voted instead for Mr. Adams. Thus, Mr. Adams won by a vote of 71 electoral votes to 68 electoral votes received by Mr. Jefferson. Jefferson, in effect, had the election stolen from him. Other abuses and miscarriages of the popular will could be pointed out in every Presidential campaign. Again, in many States the rights and duties of electors is still a subject of bitter controversy. In 91 cases State legislatures have selected the Presidential electors. While such practice has not recently been followed, any State legislature can for any reason, or for no reason, intervene and deprive the people of their State of their rightful voice in the selection of a President. Even a properly chosen elector might die, disappear, fail to vote, or vote contrary to the will of those selecting him. At different times the entire electoral votes of Indiana, Missouri, Georgia, Arkansas, and Wisconsin have been thrown out for one reason or another. In every Presidential campaign the whole or a part of the electoral vote of any State might be challenged on some technical ground involving electors or the electoral college. In Again, under our present system, the deciding of elections in the House of Representatives is fraught with peril and uncertainty. such a contest each State has one vote and one vote only, regardless of size or population. In each of the three times in which the House of Representatives has been called upon to elect a President, their action has been subject to serious charges of fraud and political chicanery. In each case only good fortune saved the country from serious upheavals or civil strife. Under the proposed amendment all of these barriers between the people and their expressed will in the selection of a President are removed. The voter casts his vote directly for President and Vice President and has it counted. The high man wins. There is little possibility of any contest having to be decided in the Congress. Second, the electoral-college system under which a candidate receiving the most popular votes in a particular State gets all of the electoral votes of that particular State results in disfranchising minority voters within such State. In effect, under the present system, minority votes are counted for the leading candidate within a State regardless of how they may have been cast. For example, in 1944 Governor Dewey received 2,997,586 popular votes in the State of New York, yet all of the votes of the State of New York were counted for Mr. Roosevelt. In other words, nearly 3,000,000 Republicans in the State of New York were compelled to vote for Mr. Roosevelt. It is interesting to note that in this same campaign, while Governor Dewey received no electoral votes for the almost 3,000,000 popular votes cast for him in the State of New York, he did receive 62 electoral votes from only 2,663,484 votes cast for him in 10 other States. Similar incongruities could be cited in almost every campaign. In the Lincoln-Douglas campaign, Douglas, while receiving 74 percent of Lincoln's popular vote, received only 6% percent of his electoral vote. In the same campaign, while receiving three times as many popular votes as did Bell, Douglas received only one-third as many electoral votes as did Bell. In 1912 Woodrow Wilson, with 42 percent of the popular vote, received 82 percent of the electoral vote. In 1936 Roosevelt, with 60 percent of the popular vote, received 98 percent of the electoral vote. In 1940 he received 54 percent of the popular vote and 84 percent of the electoral vote. In 1924 John W. Davis received 6,000,000 popular votes which brought him no electoral votes, while from 2,000,000 other popular votes he received 136 electoral votes. In 1932 Hoover received 15,800,000 popular votes, and over 13,600,000 of them brought him no electoral votes. In 1912 Wilson received 1 electoral vote for each 14,500 popular votes, while Taft received only 1 electoral vote for each 435,000 popular votes. These examples could be multiplied by the number of Presidential campaigns in the Nation's history. Under the proposed amendment, minority votes would not be discarded or counted contrary to the way in which they were cast. The electoral vote would in all cases reflect exactly the popular vote within a State. All votes would be counted, and all count alike (except a small differential resulting from the different proportion of persons voting in different States). There would no longer be doubtful States, or nondoubtful States, or oneparty States. Third, the electoral-college system now largely confines and now largely restricts Presidential campaigns to a half-dozen pivotal States. Small States, so-called "one-party" States, or the nondoubtful States, receive practically no attention from any party or any candidate. The great bulk of campaign money is spent, and the big part of the campaign work is done, in the large pivotal States where the change of a few votes means getting all of the electoral votes of such State, and where it means losing or winning an election. This is a most unwholesome and dangerous situation. The proposed amendment would do away with this overwhelmingly preponderant political power now concentrated in a few areas of the country. Fourth, our present electoral-college system not only permits, but actually invites and encourages the domination of Presidential campaigns by small, organized, minority groups within the large pivotal States. Political strategists, through expediency if not necessity, make direct and overt appeals to these particular groups. The system actually aggravates and accentuates the building up within these States of religious, racial, and economic blocks to the detriment of minorities and majorities alike. A few examples make it very clear. In 1884, in the State of New York, Cleveland got 563,084 votes while Blaine got 562,001 popular votes. A bare 1,000 majority in popular votes gave Mr. Cleveland all of the electoral votes of the great State of New York. Thus, a change of 600 votes in New York would have elected Blaine President. Should a similar situation again arise, as H. Repts., 80-2, vol. 2- -80 |