J.D. Prose – 1/26/13

This page was last updated on January 27, 2013.

Losing GOP scheming to rig Electoral College vote; J.D. Prose; Beaver County Times; January 26, 2013.

According to his Twitter page, Mr. Prose is a self-described “Surly progressive.” As you read this opinion column and his Twitter “tweets,” keep in mind Mr. Prose wears at least one other hat for the BCT. In addition to being an entertainer/pundit, Mr. Prose is a part-time reporter covering political stories. Ask yourself this. When a pundit gives his political opinions in one part of the paper, can he be trusted to report politics objectively elsewhere in the paper? After all, would a person whose opinion is 1+1 equals 3 report 1+1 really equals 2? Does he have a “Chinese wall” in his head to keep his opinions from bleeding into his reporting? (You may recall NPR claimed it fired Juan Williams for doing exactly what Mr. Prose does.) If it can get worse than that, Mr. Prose has made name-calling and personal attacks a foundation of his columns. If pushed, I’d be willing to bet Mr. Prose would try to excuse his writing by claiming he’s paid to be controversial and stir debate. The problem is, you don’t need to get into name-calling and personal attacks to accomplish those goals.

You can find the archive of my Prose column critiques here.

Below is a critique of portions of this column.

To start off, I’m not a fan of changing the Electoral College. Hate it, love it, or somewhere in between, it’s done OK for over 200 years. The 17th Amendment (direct election of senators) is possibly the worst amendment and an example of what can happen when we screw around with these things.

What Mr. Prose failed to note is – right or wrong – the proposal is nothing new. Both Democrats and Republicans have made the subject proposal, as well as others, when they feel it’s to their advantage. Heck, Democrats got their panties in a bunch after the 1968 election because Richard Nixon received a far greater majority of electoral votes than he did the popular vote. As a result, U.S. Rep Emanuel Celler (D-NY) and Sen. Birch Bayh (D-IN) pushed an amendment to eliminate the Electoral College. The proposal passed the House (339-70) but failed to meet the two-thirds majority in the Senate required to amend the Constitution.

If you want to see a “little sneak attack on democracy,” check out the People’s Republic of California. In 2011, “California Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation on Monday that would award the Golden State’s 55 electoral votes to the presidential candidate garnering the most votes nationwide.” Yes folks, you read that right. Regardless of which candidate won in California, the state’s electoral votes would go the country’s popular-vote winner. Now that’s “disenfranchising” voters. A quick search of his columns found Mr. Prose didn’t mention anything about this.

If you think SEIU management’s opposition to the sale of Friendship Ridge has anything to do with “high quality care to the sickest and and [sic] most vulnerable in our community … and the workers who dedicate their lives to caring for them” (as per its petition), I have a bridge to sell you. Representing employees is simply a fund-raising chore labor union management must endure to provide funds for its lobbying and political activities. Heck, AFL-CIO CEO Richard Trumka conceded as much when he said, “I got into the labor movement not because I wanted to negotiate wages. I got into the labor movement because I saw it as a vehicle to do massive social change to improve the lots of people.” According to its 2011 LM-2 report, SEIU National Headquarters spent over $54 million for “Political Activities and Lobbying.” In 2010, 2008, and 2006, that figure was $55 million, $67 million, and $27 million, respectively.

SEIU management opposition to selling Friendship Ridge is simply about SEIU revenue and its potentially diminished ability to fund leftist political candidates. According to FEC data for the 2012 election cycle, 100% of SEIU contributions to federal candidates went to Democrats. SEIU management figures it won’t get as cushy a deal – or any deal – from a private-sector owner, and fewer dollars mean a less powerful seat at the lefty table.

Critiques of two letters-to-the-editor on this subject are here and here.