Harassment or Hail Mary? Electors feel besieged

To supporters of Hillary Clinton, the number looks intoxicating: 172 electors in states where the popular vote went for Donald Trump — some by slim margins — who apparently aren't legally bound to vote for the GOP presidential nominee when the Electoral College meets Dec. 19.

Solicit them like lobbyists schmooze members of Congress, right? Persuade just a portion and you've got the first woman president, winner of the popular vote, certified by a constitutional authority.

She's got 232 in the bag. She would need 38 so-called "faithless electors" to win this game.

But that's the problem with this particular political fantasy. Though electors in several states report that they're getting thousands of emails, letters and even telephone calls to ask them to switch their votes, they're among the Republican Party's most loyal members.

"I fully intend to vote for Donald Trump," said Jim Skaggs of Bowling Green, Ky., one of that state's eight electors who added that he really doesn't like Trump. "It's not a law, I don't think. ... But I think it’s a duty."

And he's right. Kentucky is one of 25 states, according to the Congressional Research Service, that don't mandate their electors to vote for the winner of their state's popular vote. The Constitution and federal law are silent on the matter.

More than 4.5 million supporters have signed a Change.org petition advocating electors' change of heart, but the desire is little more than a pipe dream, election experts say. Two Democratic electors in Colorado and Washington state, where Clinton won the electoral votes and electors are obligated under state law to vote for her, have launched their own movement that they've dubbed "Moral Electors" to achieve the same result — or more likely throw the decision to the House of Representatives as happened in 1824.

“This is a longshot. It’s a Hail Mary,” P. Bret Chiafalo of Everett, Wash., told Politico. “However, I do see situations where — when we’ve already had two or three (Republican) electors state publicly they didn’t want to vote for Trump. How many of them have real issues with Donald Trump in private?”

Where Chiafalo sees a Hail Mary play, some Trump electors consider the drama more as harassment.

"Hillary's got a great campaign going," said Sharon Geise, an elector from Mesa, Ariz., who estimates 8,000 emails have flooded her inbox. "It's the same thing, pretty much. Basically: Vote for Hillary Clinton. It's bizarre. I don't dare answer my phone."

A dozen letters urging her to back anybody but Trump arrived at her home Thursday.

"She has to stop all of this," Geise said of Clinton. "This is ridiculous."

It's not clear whether Clinton supports this movement. She conceded to Trump on the day after the election, and President Obama, a Democrat who endorsed his former secretary of state, has committed to a smooth transition of power.

But even delegations from states such as Florida that inflict penalties for voting by conscience instead of popular vote haven't escaped activists' barrage.

In Florida, a faithless elector would be charged with a misdemeanor, prohibited from casting an Electoral College vote and replaced, presumably with an alternate more faithful to the popular-vote results in the state, said Franita Tolson, a voting rights law professor at Florida State University. And that elector's political future within the GOP would be toast.

Historically, fewer than two electors per presidential election have changed their votes because they didn't want the candidate on whose slate they ran, according to FairVote.org, a District of Columbia-based nonpartisan nonprofit. The most recent was in 2004 and might have been a mistake.


JOIN THE CONVERSATION

To find out more about Facebook commenting please read the
Conversation Guidelines and FAQs

Leave a Comment