This Morning With Ray Dunaway November 6, 2017

Here’s what’s coming up this morning with Ray Dunaway.

6:20- Jill Schlesinger, CFP® CBS News  Business Analyst, is back on the air.

6:50-  Paul Stockton is a former Asst. Secretary of Defense who is an internationally-recognized leader in infrastructure resilience. Dr. Stockton discusses the key vulnerability in the US power grid (as identified by DOE) arising from the increased interdependence of the natural gas and electric systems – and how he sees that vulnerability.

7:20- Tara Ross, author of The Indispensable Electoral College: How the Founders’ Plan Saves Our Country from Mob Rule, wants to know if Hillary is so upset with alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, then why does she call to destroy the Electoral College, the institution that makes collusion more difficult?

8:20- Melissa Russell, spokesperson for the Registrars of Voters Association of Connecticut (ROVAC) and a local registrar of voters in Bethlehem, talks about Election Day (Tuesday), encouraging everyone to vote in the municipal elections, and also Election Day Registrations (which we have in CT) and how people should always call their local registrars with any questions.

8:50- City Manager John Salomone of Norwich is in the spotlight for this week’s Mayor Monday.

All this, plus Weather and Traffic on the 8′s and much more.  Tune in to WTIC NewsTalk 1080 or Click Here to listen online. Catch up on Ray Dunaway’s latest interviews HERE.

More from Ray Dunaway
Comments

One Comment

  1. With the current system (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), a small number of people in a closely divided “battleground” state can potentially affect enough popular votes to swing all of that state’s electoral votes.

    537 votes, all in one state determined the 2000 election, when there was a lead of 537,179 (1,000 times more) popular votes nationwide.

    The current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes maximizes the incentive and opportunity for fraud, mischief, coercion, intimidation, confusion, and voter suppression. A very few people can change the national outcome by adding, changing, or suppressing a small number of votes in one closely divided battleground state. With the current system all of a state’s electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who receives a bare plurality of the votes in each state. The sheer magnitude of the national popular vote number, compared to individual state vote totals, is much more robust against manipulation.

    National Popular Vote would limit the benefits to be gained by fraud or voter suppression. One suppressed vote would be one less vote. One fraudulent vote would only win one vote in the return. In the current electoral system, one fraudulent vote could mean 55 electoral votes, or just enough electoral votes to win the presidency without having the most popular votes in the country.

    The closest popular-vote election count over the last 130+ years of American history (in 1960), had a nationwide margin of more than 100,000 popular votes. The closest electoral-vote election in American history (in 2000) was determined by 537 votes, all in one state, when there was a lead of 537,179 (1,000 times more) popular votes nationwide.

    For a national popular vote election to be as easy to switch as 2000, it would have to be two hundred times closer than the 1960 election–and, in popular-vote terms, forty times closer than 2000 itself.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Connecticut

Sign Up Today!
Hear WTIC Podcasts
At The Box Office

Listen Live