Ask Civics 101: How Does a Contested Convention Work?

Nominating conventions are about party morale, celebrating, and formally anointing the chosen candidate. There hasn’t been a contested convention — a convention when there is no clear winner on the ballot — since 1952. What happens when states have to vote more than once?

NHPR Fellow Tat Bellamy-Walker guest hosts for this episode on contested conventions with Shannon Bow O’Brien.

---

Sonix is the best audio automated transcription service in 2020. Our automated transcription algorithms works with many of the popular audio file formats.

Adia Samba-Quee:
Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
For an ever so brief moment here at Civics 101, we had the pleasure and privilege of working with Tat Bellamy-Walker, our fellow here at the station. Now Tat, of course, went and got himself a full time job there. Gain is our great loss. But he did make an episode of Civics 101 before he left us. Without further ado, here's Tat Bellamy-Walker with contested conventions.

Gerald Ford:
Mr. Chairman, delegates and alternates to this Republican convention. I am honored by your nomination and I accept it.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
This is Gerald Ford.

He was the Republican nominee for president in 1976.

Republicans have had some tough competition. Let me say this from the bottom of my heart. After the scrimmages of the past few months, it really feels good to have Ronald Reagan on the same side of the line.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
He's giving a speech to a room of delegates during the 1976 Republican National Convention. The convention helps the party select a nominee for president. Ford just won the nomination after an intense battle with candidate Ronald Reagan. This all helped Ford move forward as the party's choice.

I'm Tat Bellamy-Walker, a fellow here at Civics 101. Today, we're answering this listener's question: would a contested convention be similar to a caucus? And by caucus, the listener means the process of a party coming together and discussing why they like their candidate.

But before we do that, let's start with what conventions are.

Shannon Bow O'Brien:
Conventions are to formally select the presidential candidate.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
That's Shannon Bow O'Brien, a political science professor at the University of Texas at Austin. O'Brien describes this as a big cheerleading party. She says this is where delegates cast their votes with hopes of moving the candidate to the general election.

Shannon Bow O'Brien:
So it's this giant rally to get everybody excited about the candidate and the candidate gets to speak and put forward their agenda.

And often the party platform is often created or finalized at the convention to where the candidate will say, you know, if you elect me, this is the list of stuff we're going to do. That's often managed, too.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
But then we have contested conventions. A contested convention happens when no candidate gets the majority of delegate votes during the state primaries. The one in 1976 was closed for the Republicans, but Ford pulled out enough delegates to not force a contested convention. And these days, because of the primary and caucus process, contested conventions are rare. We usually know who the candidate is before the convention even starts.

Shannon Bow O'Brien:
We haven't had one really in my lifetime.

Shannon Bow O'Brien:
The last time this happened was during the 1952 Democratic Convention in Chicago, when a reluctant Adlai Stevenson, then governor of Illinois, won the nomination with outgoing President Truman support. This was in effect like a caucus. Candidates wheeled and dealed and made concessions, and one by one they dropped out. It took three rounds of voting to beat out his opponents. And in this round, Stevenson received 617 votes. Stevenson's win appears to be a result of a deep racial divide. Truman believed nominating a candidate from a state with Jim Crow laws in force would turn black and northern white voters away from voting for the Democratic Party. Contested conventions might seem bad, but Shannon says that's a misconception.

Shannon Bow O'Brien:
A lot of times I think people think with a contested convention that they're kind of in disarray or they're crazy. A lot of it just means the states are really divided and the states have no one candidate could get a good job of selling themselves across the state.

Tat Bellamy-Walker:
So that's how a contested convention works. Do you have a question about our election process or anything else civics related, you could submit your question at Civics101podcast.org. That's Civics101podcast.org.

Automatically convert your audio files to text with Sonix. Sonix is the best online, automated transcription service.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Better audio means a higher transcript accuracy rate. Easily and quickly transcribe your lectures and research interviews; Sonix is made for and has generous student discounts. Transcribing by hand is no longer necessary; put away those headphones. Easily organize and search all of your transcripts after they have been transcribed and polished by your team. Automated transcription is getting more accurate with each passing day. Convert your audio to subtitles and fine tune the timing with out advanced subtitle editor.

Create better transcripts with online automated transcription. Powerful integrations with the most popular software allows Sonix to easily fit within your workflow. Sonix takes transcription to a whole new level. Make your audio files more accessible with Sonix's automated transcription algorithms.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Sonix is the best online audio transcription software in 2020—it's fast, easy, and affordable.

If you are looking for a great way to convert your audio to text, try Sonix today.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: Holidays at the White House

Who had the first Christmas tree in the White House? Who had the first menorah? And when did we start the tradition of FLOTUS choosing a Christmas theme? All that and more in this short episode about celebrating the season at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Click here to see photos of all the First Lady’s themes since 1961!

---

holidays at the white house.mp3 transcript powered by Sonix—easily convert your audio to text with Sonix.

holidays at the white house.mp3 was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the latest audio-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors. Sonix is the best audio automated transcription service in 2020. Our automated transcription algorithms works with many of the popular audio file formats.

Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,

Nick Capodice:
Hannah Holy Cats. It's been a crazy year. Today, I just want to take a little break.

Hannah McCarthy:
Take a holiday, you know.

Nick Capodice:
And that's what we're going to do today. You're listening to Civics 101. I'm jolly old, not St Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy:
And I'm just regular old Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice:
And today we're going to talk about the history of Christmas and Hanukkah at the White House. Can I can I put Sleigh Ride in here? Is sleigh ride in the Creative Commons? Are we going to get sued? The sounds a little like Sleigh Ride.

Hannah McCarthy:
Ok, let's kick it off with the Hanukkah. How long have we celebrated the eight days of light in the White House?

Nick Capodice:
Both recently and not so recently. Do you want to guess the first president with a Hanukkah story?

Hannah McCarthy:
I think I know this one.

Nick Capodice:
Who is it?

Hannah McCarthy:
I think it's Jimmy Carter.

Hannah McCarthy:
Is it?

Nick Capodice:
Well, kind of. It's George Washington.

Hannah McCarthy:
No way.

Nick Capodice:
In Valley Forge.

Nick Capodice:
It's a second hand account, but it is a credible one. There was a soldier who is sitting apart from the others. He was huddled over two small candles, and when Washington asked him about it, and he told him all about the holiday. And from that account, the general was, quote, warmed by the inspiration of those little flames and the knowledge that miracles are possible.

Hannah McCarthy:
That's really lovely.

Nick Capodice:
And then, yes, Jimmy Carter, we have, then we have 200 years of just Christmas at the White House. Jimmy Carter 1979 was the first president to acknowledge the holiday, giving remarks and lighting the menorah at Lafayette Park. Since then, every president has participated in a menorah lighting ceremony. But Bill Clinton was the first president to have one in the White House itself in 1993 where this happened.

Hannah McCarthy:
Oh, what is that?

Nick Capodice:
That is a young girl's hair catching on fire on the menorah. And the president snuffed it out with his bare hands.

Nick Capodice:
And I know we're focusing on Hanukkah and Christmas, but I just have to touch on one other significant Jewish holiday. Barack Obama is the first and so far only sitting president to host a Passover Seder in the White House.

Hannah McCarthy:
All right. Let's move on to Christmas. We said on many a trivia night that Franklin Pierce was the first president to have a Christmas tree.

Nick Capodice:
So wrong.

Hannah McCarthy:
Really,

Nick Capodice:
It's wrong. We were wrong. Hosting trivia was wrong. I read that, too. But it is disputed. By the way, the Wikipedia page on White House Christmas trees is hilariously edited. It says that Pierce might have had the first Christmas tree, but it can't be certified. And then it says you shouldn't be using Wikipedia as a source. But we do know that Benjamin Harrison had the first indoor tree in the late 1880s. So we'll go with that. And after that, some presidents had one, some presidents didn't. William McKinley was urged by a newspaper editorials to not get one because it was un-American. Trees inside the house are a German tradition. It was unpatriotic.

Hannah McCarthy:
That's right, O Tannenbaum. Let's get to the modern day tradition, which I believe was that by Jackie Kennedy, where the first lady is in charge of choosing a theme for the White House Christmas tree.

Nick Capodice:
Sure. So while Mamie Eisenhower was the first to traditionally put the tree in the Blue Room, as you said, Jackie Kennedy started the theme tradition. She chose a Nutcracker theme for that first one in 1961. And every first lady thereafter has chosen a theme. There are so many they're, so wonderful, we're going to put a link to all the themes on our website. Quick standouts are Lady Bird Johnson's Gingerbread Tree in 1968, Michelle Obama's Military Badges and Medals Tree in 2011. And my personal favorite, lest we forget, Pat Nixon 1973 with the theme of James Monroe. And as to the tree itself, there is a national competition held every year by the National Christmas Tree Association, the champion of which gets to put it in the Blue Room.

Hannah McCarthy:
Last thing. What about Christmas parties?

Nick Capodice:
John Adams had the first White House Christmas party in 1800 and they've just continued to happen ever since and were just about to jump into a new administration. So who knows what the next Christmas tree theme is going to be? Who knows how holidays are going to change at the White House. But after doing this research for this, I am just full of holiday anticipation. Happy holidays.

Hannah McCarthy:
Happy holidays.

Nick Capodice:
And if you have a question that's not about Christmas trees, you can submit it to our Web site, Civics101podcast.org.

Automatically convert your audio files to text with Sonix. Sonix is the best online, automated transcription service.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Transcription is now more accurate and more affordable. Colleges and universities use Sonix to convert their lectures, classroom sessions, and research recordings to text. Automated transcription is getting more accurate with each passing day. Easily and quickly transcribe your lectures and research interviews; Sonix is made for and has generous student discounts. Sonix has the world's best audio transcription platform with features focused on collaboration. Automatically and accurately translate your transcript with Sonix.

Better organize your audio files with Sonix; it's really easy. Are you a podcaster looking for automated transcription? Sonix can help you better transcribe your podcast episodes. Let powerful computers do the work for you; automated transcription in minutes. Automated transcription is better when you can easily collaborate and share the transcripts; our powerful permissioning system makes collaboration a breeze.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Sonix is the best online audio transcription software in 2020—it's fast, easy, and affordable.

If you are looking for a great way to convert your audio to text, try Sonix today.

---

Transcript

[00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,

Nick Capodice: [00:00:03] Hannah Holy Cats. It's been a crazy year. Today, I just want to take a little break.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:11] Take a holiday, you know.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:12] And that's what we're going to do today. You're listening to Civics 101. I'm jolly old, not St Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:18] And I'm just regular old Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:21] And today we're going to talk about the history of Christmas and Hanukkah at the White House. Can I can I put Sleigh Ride in here? Is sleigh ride in the Creative Commons? Are we going to get sued? The sounds a little like Sleigh Ride.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:31] Ok, let's kick it off with the Hanukkah. How long have we celebrated the eight days of light in the White House?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:38] Both recently and not so recently. Do you want to guess the first president with a Hanukkah story?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:44] I think I know this one.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:45] Who is it?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:45] I think it's Jimmy Carter.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:49] Is it?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:50] Well, kind of. It's George Washington.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:52] No way.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:53] In Valley Forge.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:55] It's a second hand account, but it is a credible one. There was a soldier who is sitting apart from the others. He was huddled over two small candles, and when Washington asked him about it, and he told him all about the holiday. And from that account, the general was, quote, warmed by the inspiration of those little flames and the knowledge that miracles are possible.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:14] That's really lovely.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:16] And then, yes, Jimmy Carter, we have, then we have 200 years of just Christmas at the White House. Jimmy Carter 1979 was the first president to acknowledge the holiday, giving remarks and lighting the menorah at Lafayette Park. Since then, every president has participated in a menorah lighting ceremony. But Bill Clinton was the first president to have one in the White House itself in 1993 where this happened.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:40] Oh, what is that?

Nick Capodice: [00:01:43] That is a young girl's hair catching on fire on the menorah. And the president snuffed it out with his bare hands.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:52] And I know we're focusing on Hanukkah and Christmas, but I just have to touch on one other significant Jewish holiday. Barack Obama is the first and so far only sitting president to host a Passover Seder in the White House.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:04] All right. Let's move on to Christmas. We said on many a trivia night that Franklin Pierce was the first president to have a Christmas tree.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:13] So wrong.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:14] Really,

Nick Capodice: [00:02:15] It's wrong. We were wrong. Hosting trivia was wrong. I read that, too. But it is disputed. By the way, the Wikipedia page on White House Christmas trees is hilariously edited. It says that Pierce might have had the first Christmas tree, but it can't be certified. And then it says you shouldn't be using Wikipedia as a source. But we do know that Benjamin Harrison had the first indoor tree in the late 1880s. So we'll go with that. And after that, some presidents had one, some presidents didn't. William McKinley was urged by a newspaper editorials to not get one because it was un-American. Trees inside the house are a German tradition. It was unpatriotic.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:53] That's right, O Tannenbaum. Let's get to the modern day tradition, which I believe was that by Jackie Kennedy, where the first lady is in charge of choosing a theme for the White House Christmas tree.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:04] Sure. So while Mamie Eisenhower was the first to traditionally put the tree in the Blue Room, as you said, Jackie Kennedy started the theme tradition. She chose a Nutcracker theme for that first one in 1961. And every first lady thereafter has chosen a theme. There are so many they're, so wonderful, we're going to put a link to all the themes on our website. Quick standouts are Lady Bird Johnson's Gingerbread Tree in 1968, Michelle Obama's Military Badges and Medals Tree in 2011. And my personal favorite, lest we forget, Pat Nixon 1973 with the theme of James Monroe. And as to the tree itself, there is a national competition held every year by the National Christmas Tree Association, the champion of which gets to put it in the Blue Room.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:52] Last thing. What about Christmas parties?

Nick Capodice: [00:03:55] John Adams had the first White House Christmas party in 1800 and they've just continued to happen ever since and were just about to jump into a new administration. So who knows what the next Christmas tree theme is going to be? Who knows how holidays are going to change at the White House. But after doing this research for this, I am just full of holiday anticipation. Happy holidays.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:04:15] Happy holidays.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:16] And if you have a question that's not about Christmas trees, you can submit it to our Web site, Civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Is Voter Fraud?

Claims of voter fraud are widespread but is voter fraud itself? What is voter fraud, how often does it happen, and what do claims of voter fraud reveal about voter perception? Professor Justin Levitt talks us through this murky subject.

---

VoterFraud_PRX.mp3 was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the latest audio-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors. Sonix is the best audio automated transcription service in 2020. Our automated transcription algorithms works with many of the popular audio file formats.

Adia Samba-Quee:
Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Hannah McCarthy:
We heard it a lot this year, voter fraud, widespread, rampant election, ruining voter fraud. Yet at the same time, election officials say they can't find the evidence of significant fraud. So what is the truth about voter fraud? This is civics 101. I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice:
I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy:
And today we're finding out what fraud actually is, how often it happens and what voter fraud allegations tell us about elections.

Justin Levitt:
Voter fraud does usually happen.

Hannah McCarthy:
This is Justin Levitt, law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. He says, yes, there are various types of voter fraud and they do happen very rarely.

Justin Levitt:
The important thing to know is that real voter fraud is based on breaking the law in some way.

Nick Capodice:
So this would be like trying to vote more than once.

Hannah McCarthy:
Yes. And impersonating an eligible voter, voting in more than one state or attempting to.

Laws vary from state to state, but in many it is a felony to, for example, vote more than once. Sometimes this is nefarious or sometimes it's a relative voting for their deceased loved one to carry out their last wishes. Either way, though, it is illegal but very, very rare.

Justin Levitt:
The way to distinguish these real incidents from hot takes that turn out to be fiction is to find real facts that show real wrongdoing against real law. And unfortunately, all too often what we hear are claims of voter fraud that are based in I don't like people who don't think like I do voting.

Nick Capodice:
In other words, unsubstantiated voter fraud claims could just be frustration that someone else's candidate won.

Hannah McCarthy:
Or confusion.

Justin Levitt:
That seems fishy to me, but I don't really understand how the rules of the elections work. And it's real easy to jump really quickly in a conspiratorial mindset from this. Seems strange, but I don't understand too. That must be fraud.

Hannah McCarthy:
Justin gave this example of someone suspecting that it's voter fraud for someone to vote in a state in which they do not live, when actually that's just a misunderstanding of legal absentee voting.

Justin Levitt:
Mike Pence votes in Indiana but doesn't live there. Many, many, many, many, many members of the military live in a place that is not their voting residence and vote in a place where they are not currently living. That's not fraud.

Hannah McCarthy:
So actual fraud, while it exists, is exceedingly rare. Still, legislators pass laws like voter ID laws that tighten election security in order to prevent widespread fraud from happening. But those laws are really controversial.

Justin Levitt:
Every state has some means to make sure that you are who you say you are when you go to. But the question isn't, should we have a way to prove that you are who you say you are? The question is, what kind of things should we permit in order to make sure that the election system is reasonably secure, while also making sure that we are not unreasonably locking out eligible voters?

Hannah McCarthy:
Justin says it's important to recognize that insistences of voter fraud with no evidence of voter fraud gives you insight into how voters are feeling. It has to do with intense emotion rather than clear fact.

Justin Levitt:
They're expressions of frustration. They're expressions of anguish. They are communications about disengagement with the system that we have there often not really about whether the law was broken in a particular way in a particular jurisdiction. But if we can recognize that a large part of that conversation is expressing some other deeper disengagement that may help point the way toward embracing all of the voters who participate in the process.

Hannah McCarthy:
We have far from solved the problem of voter fraud, real or imagined.

But here's to hoping we've shed a little light on a murky idea. If you have any questions about the way things are working or not in this country, we will try to find the answers, even if they are dissatisfying. Just click the button at the top of our home page at Civics101podcast.org.

Automatically convert your audio files to text with Sonix. Sonix is the best online, automated transcription service.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Use Sonix to simplify your audio workflow. Do you have a lot of background noise in your audio files? Here's how you can remove background audio noise for free. Imagine a world where automated transcription just works. Researchers better analyze their interviews by transcribing their video and audio recordings with Sonix. Better audio means a higher transcript accuracy rate. Are you a podcaster looking for automated transcription? Sonix can help you better transcribe your podcast episodes.

Create better transcripts with online automated transcription. Automatically and accurately translate your transcript with Sonix. Save time and money with automated transcription. Sonix accurately converts most popular audio file formats (like WAV, MP3, OGG, and AIF) to text.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Sonix is the best online audio transcription software in 2020—it's fast, easy, and affordable.

If you are looking for a great way to convert your audio to text, try Sonix today.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: How Is a Seat Filled When a Member of Congress Takes Another Job?

This January, Senator Kamala Harris will resign her seat to become vice president. How will that seat be filled? How does the process differ among states, and also between both chambers of Congress?

Our guest today is Matthew Tokeshi, Assistant Professor of political science at Williams College.

---

filling vacant seats.mp3 transcript powered by Sonix—easily convert your audio to text with Sonix.

filling vacant seats.mp3 was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the latest audio-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors. Sonix is the best audio automated transcription service in 2020. Our automated transcription algorithms works with many of the popular audio file formats.

Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting

And I'm curious if anybody has already started to pitch themselves as a replacement to You.

Well, you may be the only one that hasn't unless you just did.

Nick Capodice:
You're listening to Civics 101 I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy:
I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice:
And today we're answering this question. Our listener Judy wrote, How is a U.S. senator seat filled after they're elected president or vice president?

Matt Tokeshi:
I don't know if this listener question was inspired by Kamala Harris, but Kamala Harris is a perfect example. Right?

Nick Capodice:
This is Matt Tokeshi. He's professor of political science at Williams College.

Matt Tokeshi:
Ok, so for Senate vacancies, each state has different rules. So the 17th Amendment of the Constitution empowers state legislatures to grant the governor the power to name a temporary replacement. So in 45 of the U.S. states, the legislature has granted that the governor that appointment power. And in five states, the legislature does not grant the governor a temporary appointment power.

Nick Capodice:
And I have to add that it's not terribly common. So far in U.S. history, 15 senators, including Kamala Harris, have resigned to become vice president. But only three U.S. senators, Barack Obama, Warren G Harding and John F. Kennedy were elected president while they were holding that Senate seat.

Hannah McCarthy:
Matt said that 45 states have the governor pick a replacement. But what about the other five states?

Nick Capodice:
So North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin don't allow gubernatorial selected Senate replacements. In those states, Senators have to be elected by the people in a special election.

Matt Tokeshi:
So Harris is a U.S. senator from California. And California is one of the 45 states that empowers its governor to appoint, in this case, Senator Harris's replacement.

Hannah McCarthy:
When Matt says these are a temporary replacement, how long does that last?

Nick Capodice:
It lasts until a special election is held. As to when that happens, it varies greatly from state to state. Most states hold it at the next statewide election, 13 states require a special election to be held in a certain time frame after that governor's appointment.

Hannah McCarthy:
Ok, that's the Senate.

Matt Tokeshi:
OK, so let me talk about the House. Article one of the Constitution says that House vacancies are filled by special elections. So unlike the Senate, there are no temporary appointment powers granted to anyone. There is a special election that's held, you know, soon after that vacancy.

Hannah McCarthy:
I'm curious about other positions besides the president and the vice president. Is the process the same if a senator or representative resigns to become a cabinet member?

Matt Tokeshi:
The rules for replacing senators and representatives joining the cabinet are the same for, you know, whether they leave to become the president or vice president or if they die or become sick or retire. This is to fill vacancies for any reason. The rules are all the same. So, for example, President elect Biden has named one U.S. in this case representative, to be a part of his cabinet so far. And that's Ohio Representative Marcia Fudge, who is going to be nominated to be the secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Ohio Democrats are already lining up to fill that Marcia Fudge seat.

Hannah McCarthy:
So when a president picks members of their cabinet, I imagine they have to consider not only the right person for the job, but also that they'll be removing that person from their current position of power.

Matt Tokeshi:
That is definitely a consideration. And that's exactly what we're seeing with what President elect Biden. There's lots of factors that go into it. So President elect Biden so far has mostly selected more, I guess, technocratic type people rather than ambitious politicians who are seeking further office. So he's opted more for people that he's personally familiar with and who are, I guess, less politically ambitious, which means he hasn't named anyone from the Senate. But if you name a senator, you don't know for sure who the replacement is going to be and where. You have a very close fight for party control in the Senate, every single one of those seats is precious. You want to be very, very careful. And in fact, the the most careful way to approach this is just to not name somebody currently in the in the Senate.

That's how we fill vacated seats in Congress here today on Civics 101. Don't forget to submit your questions at our website, civics101podcast.org.

Automatically convert your audio files to text with Sonix. Sonix is the best online, automated transcription service.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Automated algorithms have improved a lot over the past decade. Automated transcription is better when you can easily collaborate and share the transcripts; our powerful permissioning system makes collaboration a breeze. Save time and money with automated transcription. Do you have a lot of background noise in your audio files? Here's how you can remove background audio noise for free. Sonix has the world's best audio transcription platform with features focused on collaboration. Transcription agencies are able to better serve their customers by using Sonix's automated transcription in the back office.

Better organize your audio files with Sonix; it's really easy. Learn how Sonix can help you quickly and accurately transcribe your audio files. Transcription is now more accurate and more affordable. Automated transcription can quickly transcribe your skype calls. All of your remote meetings will be better indexed with a Sonix transcript.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Sonix is the best online audio transcription software in 2020—it's fast, easy, and affordable.

If you are looking for a great way to convert your audio to text, try Sonix today.

---

Transcript

[00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting

[00:00:03] And I'm curious if anybody has already started to pitch themselves as a replacement to You.

[00:00:08] Well, you may be the only one that hasn't unless you just did.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:13] You're listening to Civics 101 I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:15] I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:16] And today we're answering this question. Our listener Judy wrote, How is a U.S. senator seat filled after they're elected president or vice president?

Matt Tokeshi: [00:00:25] I don't know if this listener question was inspired by Kamala Harris, but Kamala Harris is a perfect example. Right?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:31] This is Matt Tokeshi. He's professor of political science at Williams College.

Matt Tokeshi: [00:00:35] Ok, so for Senate vacancies, each state has different rules. So the 17th Amendment of the Constitution empowers state legislatures to grant the governor the power to name a temporary replacement. So in 45 of the U.S. states, the legislature has granted that the governor that appointment power. And in five states, the legislature does not grant the governor a temporary appointment power.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:00] And I have to add that it's not terribly common. So far in U.S. history, 15 senators, including Kamala Harris, have resigned to become vice president. But only three U.S. senators, Barack Obama, Warren G Harding and John F. Kennedy were elected president while they were holding that Senate seat.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:18] Matt said that 45 states have the governor pick a replacement. But what about the other five states?

Nick Capodice: [00:01:24] So North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin don't allow gubernatorial selected Senate replacements. In those states, Senators have to be elected by the people in a special election.

Matt Tokeshi: [00:01:34] So Harris is a U.S. senator from California. And California is one of the 45 states that empowers its governor to appoint, in this case, Senator Harris's replacement.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:45] When Matt says these are a temporary replacement, how long does that last?

Nick Capodice: [00:01:50] It lasts until a special election is held. As to when that happens, it varies greatly from state to state. Most states hold it at the next statewide election, 13 states require a special election to be held in a certain time frame after that governor's appointment.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:06] Ok, that's the Senate.

Matt Tokeshi: [00:02:07] OK, so let me talk about the House. Article one of the Constitution says that House vacancies are filled by special elections. So unlike the Senate, there are no temporary appointment powers granted to anyone. There is a special election that's held, you know, soon after that vacancy.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:25] I'm curious about other positions besides the president and the vice president. Is the process the same if a senator or representative resigns to become a cabinet member?

Matt Tokeshi: [00:02:35] The rules for replacing senators and representatives joining the cabinet are the same for, you know, whether they leave to become the president or vice president or if they die or become sick or retire. This is to fill vacancies for any reason. The rules are all the same. So, for example, President elect Biden has named one U.S. in this case representative, to be a part of his cabinet so far. And that's Ohio Representative Marcia Fudge, who is going to be nominated to be the secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Ohio Democrats are already lining up to fill that Marcia Fudge seat.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:11] So when a president picks members of their cabinet, I imagine they have to consider not only the right person for the job, but also that they'll be removing that person from their current position of power.

Matt Tokeshi: [00:03:23] That is definitely a consideration. And that's exactly what we're seeing with what President elect Biden. There's lots of factors that go into it. So President elect Biden so far has mostly selected more, I guess, technocratic type people rather than ambitious politicians who are seeking further office. So he's opted more for people that he's personally familiar with and who are, I guess, less politically ambitious, which means he hasn't named anyone from the Senate. But if you name a senator, you don't know for sure who the replacement is going to be and where. You have a very close fight for party control in the Senate, every single one of those seats is precious. You want to be very, very careful. And in fact, the the most careful way to approach this is just to not name somebody currently in the in the Senate.

[00:04:12] That's how we fill vacated seats in Congress here today on Civics 101. Don't forget to submit your questions at our website, civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: How Does the Electoral College Vote?

The popular vote has been cast and the electors have been chosen but the Electoral College still needs to meet and cast their ballots. What does that actually look like? Where and when does it happen? Jessie Kratz, historian at the National Archives, gives us the play-by-play.

---

ECVotingDay_PRX.mp3 was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the latest audio-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors. Sonix is the best audio automated transcription service in 2020. Our automated transcription algorithms works with many of the popular audio file formats.

Adia Samba-Quee:
Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Hannah McCarthy:
Even though it is our job to understand it, even I sometimes need a reminder of how the Electoral College works. What do these people actually do? How is the Electoral College vote cast?

Let's take one state, Montana.

Jessie Kratz:
There's literally three people that are meeting on December 14th to cast their vote for president and vice president.

Hannah McCarthy:
This is Jesse Kratz, historian of the National Archives.

Jessie Kratz:
So some states require that the winner of the popular vote gets their electoral votes and then some states is determined by political party. So the political parties will tell their candidate, their slate, their electors, you need a vote for Biden or you need a vote for.

Nick Capodice:
So if you're on the Republican Party slate and you're an elector from the state in which the popular vote went to the Republican Party's nominee, then you get to vote.

Hannah McCarthy:
And this vote happens on the second Monday after the first Tuesday in December, which in 2020 is December 14th. The electors gather in legislative buildings in their respective states to cast paper ballots. This can be the secretary of state's office, the state capital, the governor's office, wherever state law tells them to meet.

Nick Capodice:
And if you are that Republican elector, then you're supposed to vote for the Republican nominee.

Jessie Kratz:
Some states have rules that the electors have to vote that way and other states don't.

And they can vote however they want.

Hannah McCarthy:
Which I always found a little baffling because these electors are chosen by the party. So you'd think they would vote for the party candidate. But we do encounter what are called faithless electors, people who vote for a candidate other than the candidate who won the popular vote in their state.

Jessie Kratz:
Sort of rare because the electors are really chosen from the parties faithful. So it's really unlikely that they would switch their vote to the opposite party. But this happened in 2016. An example uses a lecture from Hawaii. It was supposed to vote for Hillary Clinton, but instead voted for Bernie Sanders. And this was totally legitimate because some states have laws that the electors must vote for the popular vote winner. But Hawaii isn't one of them.

Nick Capodice:
And it is worth mentioning the Supreme Court did just issue a decision saying that it is constitutional for states to penalize faithless electors or to just nullify their votes.

Hannah McCarthy:
But if that vote checks out according to state law, here is what happens.

Jessie Kratz:
They vote for president and vice president and they vote on two separate ballots. And these are what we call certificates of vote. And this is the document that shows who the electors chose for president and vice president. And the electors have to sign, seal and certify these electoral votes. And then they send them to various officials, including the archivist of the United States.

I think we get two copies of these.

Hannah McCarthy:
Election code in each state dictates how this actually plays out.

Like in Massachusetts, the electors nominate and vote on who will be the temporary president, vice president and secretary of the Massachusetts Electoral College itself.

2004 Massachusetts Electoral meeting:
I rise to place a nomination for vice president of the Electoral College, the name of the Honorable Mushtaq Merza of Cambridge.

Hannah McCarthy:
It all varies state to state. You can actually watch these proceedings play out usually on C-SPAN. And my favorite aspect is the clothing, tuxedoes, sequined gowns, even tricorn hats. Electors really glam up for this moment.

Nick Capodice:
And unlike Election Day for general citizens, the college vote is not a secret ballot. You rise and declare who you'll be voting for, which also allows for a rare opportunity to lobby for what you believe in, even if what you believe in is abolishing the Electoral College.

2004 Massachusetts Electoral meeting:
Before I vote

I would like to say we need an electoral system that reflects that respects the sanctity of the vote. Every vote should be counted and count every vote.

And I dedicate myself to election reform.

Hannah McCarthy:
That's the end of the road for an elector's job, but it is not the end of the road for the vote itself. Those certificates have to have to make their way to the Senate where the final steps cement our president. And we'll cover that on Civics 101. And don't forget, if you have a question about the way this democracy works, we will find the answer.

Just ask us by clicking on the button at the top of our homepage at civics101podcast.org.

Automatically convert your audio files to text with Sonix. Sonix is the best online, automated transcription service.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Save time and money with automated transcription. Here are five reasons you should transcribe your podcast with Sonix. Automated transcription is getting more accurate with each passing day. Easily organize and search all of your transcripts after they have been transcribed and polished by your team. Rapid advancements in speech-to-text technology has made transcription a whole lot easier. Are you a podcaster looking for automated transcription? Sonix can help you better transcribe your podcast episodes.

Get the most out of your audio content with Sonix. Make your audio files more accessible with Sonix's automated transcription algorithms. Better organize your audio files with Sonix; it's really easy. Easily share and publish transcripts that were automatically transcribed by Sonix.

Sonix uses cutting-edge artificial intelligence to convert your mp3 files to text.

Sonix is the best online audio transcription software in 2020—it's fast, easy, and affordable.

If you are looking for a great way to convert your audio to text, try Sonix today.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: Who Are Electors?

Today on Ask Civics 101 we look into the electors- the 538 people who vote for our president on December 14th. Who can be an elector? How are they chosen? And what is it like to really vote for the president and vice president?

This episode stars Jessie Kratz, historian at the National Archives, and Marseille Allen, a certified elector from Flint, Michigan.

You can check out the many styles of certificates of ascertainment here!

Here are the three slates submitted in NH.

---

Transcript

[00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

[00:00:04] Good afternoon and welcome. On this most August occasion, electors and guests, please find your seats.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:10] You're listening to Civics 101. I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:13] I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:14] And today we're talking about electors, the 538 individuals who vote on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. This year that's December 14th. Because...

Jessie Kratz: [00:00:23] When you're casting your ballot for the presidential candidate, you're really selecting it for the slate of electors.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:30] This is Jesse Kratz, historian of the National Archives, the place responsible for administering the Electoral College.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:36] We've said it before and we'll say it again. When you vote for a president in November, you're not voting for the president. You're voting for a slate of electors.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:45] Every party before the election chooses that slate. The slate is a list of people who will cast their vote in mid-December, usually for the candidate who won the popular vote of that state.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:55] Ok, so let's use a small state as an example. New Hampshire has four electoral votes. [00:01:00] So before the election, each party chose four different people who would vote on December 14th.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:06] Yes, the office of the secretary of state in New Hampshire posted 12 names to their Web site for Democratic electors, four Republican and four libertarian. President elect Joe Biden won in New Hampshire. So those four Democrats will go to the state House on the 14th to cast their vote.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:22] Who gets to be an elector?

Nick Capodice: [00:01:23] Here's Jesse again.

Jessie Kratz: [00:01:24] So the Constitution contains very few provisions relating to the qualifications of electors. Basically, no senator or representative or person holding an office of trust or profit. That's basically no federal office holders, no political appointees, no federal judges. That's pretty much it. And this process varies from state to state. But in the most general terms, the parties nominate a slate of potential electors at their state party convention or their party's central committee chooses them. And they often choose somebody who, you know, is a party loyalist, somebody that [00:02:00] they want to recognize their service and dedication to the party. That might be a state elected official state party leader. It could be Bill Clinton if he was a private citizen at that time.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:09] Oh, that's right. I forgot. Bill Clinton in 2016 was an elector in New York and cast his vote for Hillary.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:14] Yeah, he did. In some states, you actually get to see the names of those electors on the ballot. So the bubble you fill in will say Donald Trump or Joe Biden. But below that, two different columns of names of who would actually cast that vote in December.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:28] Did the electors know they're going to be picked beforehand?

Nick Capodice: [00:02:31] Not always.

Marseille Allen: [00:02:32] I received a text message from a particular someone saying, hey, you want to be an elector? I said, absolutely, that would be great.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:41] Who's this?

Marseille Allen: [00:02:41] My name is Marseille Allen. I'm a lead agent with the Michigan Department of Corrections and a human rights activist. I was selected to be an at large elector for the state of Michigan 2020, and apparently I was selected right then and there at the convention.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:57] Michigan certified their results on November 23 [00:03:00] for Joe Biden. So Marseille will go to the State House on December 14th.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:05] Is this Marseille's first time being an elector?

Marseille Allen: [00:03:07] This is my first time. I mean, I am not an expert in history, but knowing the history of the Electoral College, I know that I am a part of a process that is extremely controversial but has determined presidents since the establishment of our country. And so it's an honor to be part of it. It's almost bittersweet. You know, the three fifths compromise was actually because of the Electoral College. People need to understand that my ancestors were not even considered a full human. So as an African-American woman who's voting for a woman of African and Indian descent to be vice president, of course, and Vice President elect Joe Biden, I wouldn't be surprised if I became emotional because of it.

Marseille Allen: [00:03:52] It is something that I haven't really come to terms with, but it's full circle from not being seen [00:04:00] as a full human being to actually determining who the president of this country is.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:06] That's electors for today. If you want to know who your own state's electors are, will have links to the National Archives with all that information on our website, Civics 101. Podcast Nhpr.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Does the National Archives Have To Do With the Electoral College?

The United States election system is notoriously decentralized but when it comes to finally certifying results, the federal government takes charge. So how do 51 far flung pieces come together to be certified in the Senate on January 6th? Leave it to the National Archives and Records Administration to make it happen. NARA historian Jessie Kratz tells us how it works.

P.S. You can check out the many versions of states’ certificates of ascertainment here!

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Does the Solicitor General Do?

The Solicitor General represents the United States in cases that make it to the Supreme Court and they’re also highly influential on the court itself. So what does it mean to be the lawyer for the U.S. and a near-honorary member of the Supreme Court? How does the SG maintain the line between Executive Branch and Judiciary? Professor Amy Steigerwalt lets us in on it.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Do Politicians Do After They Leave Office?

On January 3rd, members of the new Congress start a new session. But what about those who lost their seats? Where do they go? What do they do? Dan Cassino, Professor of Political Science at Farleigh Dickinson University, lays out their options.

---

Transcript

[00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

[00:00:06] I do respect the will of the voters here in the state of Colorado, but I also thought about my dad, you may remember some of you that he lost an election and he said the voters have spoken. The blankety blanks...

Nick Capodice: [00:00:20] Once the balloons are swept up, tears have been shed and everybody goes home, every losing candidate has to ask themselves this question, what do I do now?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:30] You're making it sound a little dramatic.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:33] I know I can't help it.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:34] But it is a good question. What do people in the House and the Senate do when they lose an election?

Dan Cassino: [00:00:40] So members of Congress, when they lose, they actually start making real money.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:45] That's Dan Casino, professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University. And I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:50] I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:51] And throw away the hankie, because today on Civics 101, we are talking about the three most common occupations of politicians once they leave Congress.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:59] When Dan says [00:01:00] real money, what is he talking about?

Dan Cassino: [00:01:02] The real money is going to come as a consultant. That is, you can turn around and take all the expertise you've built up over the years, all the influence, all the credibility you have with your colleagues and use that as a lobbyist, influence other existing members of Congress to get them to do what a group wants them to do. Now, I know this sounds corrupt. People are going to go, oh, boy, they're just cashing in. This is wrong. This is morally dubious and maybe it is. But we have to remember what the purpose of lobbying is. Lobbyists are there as information brokers. That is, they know more about a subject than members of Congress know about that subject.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:37] After the 2014 midterm elections, over a quarter of departing members of Congress stayed in D.C. and became lobbyists, which they were legally allowed to do after a one year cooling off period. But there is a reason that former congresspeople make for good lobbyists.

Dan Cassino: [00:01:53] They've got instant credibility. They also know the interpersonal relationships. They know how all of these committees work. And that is worth a lot [00:02:00] of money.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:00] How much money?

Dan Cassino: [00:02:01] Honestly, the sky is the limit. If you are particularly shameless and willing to just go and work for a lobbyist and go out and shill for that lobbyist, you can be making tens of millions of dollars.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:13] If you're a massive corporation like, let's say Lockheed Martin, spending a few million dollars on a former congressperson to lobby for legislation that favors you can make you billions more in the long run. But your financial success as a lobbyist depends on what committees you were on when you were in Congress. That committee work often gives you expertise on a particular topic. So it makes sense that you would use that knowledge to lobby members of Congress on that issue. And that is why some committees are more desirable to be on, like defense or banking or ways and means, because it offers a potentially very lucrative future.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:51] All right. So that's lobbying. What else can an outgoing member of Congress do? I know lots of people go on book tours [00:03:00] or speaking tours.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:00] Yeah, they sure do.

Dan Cassino: [00:03:02] Book tours!

[00:03:03] Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming Dr. Ron Paul.

Ron Paul: [00:03:10] The more you understand about why the problem, the better off you'll be.

Dan Cassino: [00:03:15] Lots of members of Congress go write books they're going to tour out there. You give speeches, former members of Congress can make a lot of money on the lecture circuit. Sure. If you're a former president, you can make a lot more money than that. But even if one member of Congress has more respect, you can go around on the lecture circuit and make a lot of money.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:28] Influential former politicians can charge thousands, hundreds of thousands per speech. But there is one more thing you can do when your time is done in D.C..

Dan Cassino: [00:03:38] Finally, we have to remember most members of Congress got to Congress in the first place because either they were rich people or were friends with a lot of rich people because you got to fund your campaign some way. So we do have plenty of members of Congress who are very wealthy people. They're often very often older people. And when they're done, they just retire. They do what any super wealthy 68 year old person would do, then go home and swim in the pool and maybe think about writing their memoirs and spend [00:04:00] time with the grandkids.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:02] All right. Well, that's a few of the options for those who lost in November. If you've got questions, just submit them at our website, civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What's Going On in the Georgia Senate Races?

All eyes are on Georgia as it nears a runoff election for two Senate seats — seats that have the potential to split the Senate right down the middle between Democrats and Republicans. How did this happen? And what could a 50-50 Senate split mean for Congress? Professor Casey Dominguez of the University of San Diego breaks it down.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Happens to Campaign Funds after the Election Is Over?

It doesn’t always happen (and probably shouldn’t) but occasionally there are funds leftover at the end of the long campaign road. Of course, that money was supposed to help that candidate win — and nothing else. There are some restrictions on what happens to campaign funds once all is said and done. Deborah D’Souza lays down the facts about those funds.

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:00:01] As we came towards the end of the election, I got really curious about what's going to happen to all of this money.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:06] This is Deborah D'Souza.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:00:08] Which is when I sort of pitched to my editor and was like, we talk to people about their money and investing. I think people would also be curious to know what happens to their donations.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:19] Deborah works for Investopedia. She writes about finance and she said she didn't expect her post on leftover campaign funds to be so popular. I think she was right. People want to know where all their money ends up, including us. This is a Civics 101. I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:35] I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:35] And today we're following the money to find out where campaign funds go after everything is said and done in an election.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:00:42] So when we talk about leftover funds, we're talking about when, you know, off the rent have been paid, all of the salaries have been paid. You know, the campaign have been winding down. So it's not that common, I would say, to have leftover funds. It's not that good either. You've probably not spent it correctly. [00:01:00]

Nick Capodice: [00:01:00] So leftover campaign funds are not necessarily a good thing?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:04] People gave you that money to use. They want you to get elected. And campaigning is really expensive. Every dollar that you have leftover is money that you did not spend on campaign ads and T-shirts and fliers and rallies. But let's say after all is said and done and you've paid off all of your debts, you still have money left over.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:01:26] So the main rule to remember is no personal use so that no mortgage, groceries, gas, no country club membership, college tuition.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:38] The Federal Election Commission says you can spend that leftover cash on only a handful of things.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:01:43] One of them is donated to charity. The other thing you can do is you can transfer it to a future campaign if you're planning to run again, or you can transfer the whole amount to a national political party or local political party. At state political party committee, [00:02:00] you can give a small amount to another candidate. I think it's two thousand dollars to another candidate. So those are the main ways the FEC allows you to use it. You can also do nothing.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:12] Do nothing like just let the money sit there?

Deborah D'Souza: [00:02:15] You'll find reports of people leaving thousands or sometimes millions in the bank collecting interest for years. And when they're being asked by reporters why from this money going to charity or why you being put to use by the political party affiliated.

[00:02:32] But they'll tell you that they haven't planned whether they're going to run again or they haven't really decided what they're going to do with the money.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:39] And the FEC says if you drop out of the race, you have to redistribute re-designate or refund funds within 60 days.

[00:02:46] Campaign committees rarely go the refund route, though.

Deborah D'Souza: [00:02:50] Which brings us to like a big gaping loophole in the FEC rules is that they say no personal use, but you can transfer [00:03:00] this money to something called the leadership PAC. And the rules for leadership PACs are completely different to the personal use rule doesn't apply there. You can use it for travel, you can use it for dinner, concert tickets, all in the name of fundraising. And politicians have used their leadership PACs quite lavishly.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:22] Doesn't the FEC have a number of vacancies right now? I read there aren't enough people on the commission to even hold a meeting. So even if these leadership PACs were misusing funds, would anyone do anything about it?

Deborah D'Souza: [00:03:35] The FEC has basically been shut down since July. They haven't had the quorum to have meetings or enforcement rulings since July. And the process they have is audits or complaints that are submitted to them. And I just don't know how that will work if the agency that's supposed to enforce the rules have basically been shut down [00:04:00] for months and months while all of the fundraising has gone on.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:03] Well, isn't that just a friendly little reminder that democracy only works when people enforce its principles?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:04:08] That does it for the fate of campaign funds. If you have a question about the way this democracy works or doesn't ask us, just click the button at the top of our home page at Civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: How Do We Add States? What Is the Difference Between a State and a Commonwealth?

Today’s listener question is a twofer: “What is the difference between a state and a commonwealth and which will Puerto Rico become?” We discuss the differences, the reason Puerto Rico might become a state, and how adding states has benefited political parties.

Our guest for today is Robinson Woodward-Burns, a professor of political science at Howard University.

---

Transcript

Nick Capodice: [00:00:00] You're listening to Civics 101 I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:02] I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:03] Today's question comes from our listener, Jennifer, who wrote "What is the difference between a state and a commonwealth? Will Puerto [00:00:10] Rico become a state or a commonwealth?" So we will explain those differences and the history and process of adding states to our union, stars to our canton.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:19] I grew up in a commonwealth. [00:00:20] So what is the difference between that and a state?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:23] Well, the short answer is none whatsoever.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:27] None at all.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:27] No. At least if we're talking about the four states [00:00:30] that refer to themselves as Commonwealth: Massachusetts, Kentucky, Virginia and Pennsylvania, there is no legal distinction between them in a state. And anyway, it's purely political [00:00:40] philosophy. When those states wrote their constitutions in the 17 and 18 hundreds, they used the term Commonwealth to more align themselves [00:00:50] with the thoughts of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. It was a common term back then representing the ideals of a democratic state.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:56] It's actually quite lovely. But what about Puerto Rico? [00:01:00]

Nick Capodice: [00:01:00] Oh, well, here we go. Puerto Rico is one of five U.S. territories. They also refer to themselves as a commonwealth. But again, they are a territory, meaning [00:01:10] they currently have no representation. Over three million Americans live there, but they don't send anyone to Congress. They don't have any electoral votes. They don't vote for president. They don't pay [00:01:20] federal income taxes, but they do pay payroll taxes.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:23] However, this November, the people of Puerto Rico voted that they wished to become the fiftyfirst [00:01:30] state.

[00:01:31] Ms. Colon, for five minutes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On November the 3rd, Puerto Rican voters made a clear choice to become a permanent part of this [00:01:40] union, to become a state in equal footing, an equal responsibility with the 50 states.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:45] So to learn about the process of adding Puerto Rico as a state, I spoke to Robinson Woodward-Burns. He's [00:01:50] a professor of political science at Howard University. He first told me why the Democratic Party is interested in adding it as a state.

Robinson Woodward-Burns: [00:01:58] One thing that we see is that the Senate [00:02:00] is malapportioned. It over-represents rural areas. And this is is pretty famous. If you look, for example, at Wyoming, this is a state with two escalators and two senators it [00:02:10] over represents its constituents, particularly relative to, say, California, which is a much more populous state. So it's a famous sort of problem. [00:02:20] It's built into the Constitution and it would take a constitutional amendment to revise that. And those small rural states are never going to allow an amendment like that to be [00:02:30] ratified. So if the Senate is unfixable, the answer might be to just bring in more states.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:35] We've shifted gears here from naming conventions like Commonwealth versus [00:02:40] state to actually creating a state. Which sounds like it would benefit one party over another.

Robinson Woodward-Burns: [00:02:49] People will say that [00:02:50] again, this might be a partisan move, but it's always been partisan. When Republicans in Congress in 1889 were facing pretty long [00:03:00] shot electoral odds in the 1890 election, they simply created six new states and they got 12 senators out of it. The Dakota territory became two different [00:03:10] states overnight, and this has been done often in 1860 for Nevada, with 20000 people, became a state in advance of the 1864 election. [00:03:20]

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:20] I did not know that.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:21] Me neither. And maybe it's because it's been so long since any states have been admitted.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:26] I know Washington, D.C. is being considered for statehood as well, and [00:03:30] both they and Puerto Rico lean Democrat.So if they're both admitted, that would add four senators from the Democratic Party?

Nick Capodice: [00:03:39] Maybe [00:03:40].

Robinson Woodward-Burns: [00:03:40] Congress under Article four has broad authority over the territories, including Puerto Rico, to admit those states. Again, the two sort of arguments against D.C. and Puerto [00:03:50] Rico statehood, that it's partisan, that sort of misses the point and that, you know, their constitutional objections to that. I don't think those really stand up historically. I think the real barrier [00:04:00] to D.C. and Puerto Rico statehood are whether Democrats are actually willing to play hardball come January 3rd, should they take the Senate. And that remains to be seen.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:10] And [00:04:10] flag makers would indeed have their work cut out. That's Commonwealths and adding states on Civics 101. You can submit your questions at our Web site civics101podcast@nhpr.org. [00:04:20]

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Is an Executive Order?

Sometimes it’s easier for a president to circumvent our complex legislative process and just do something.

Today we answer a listener question about executive orders: what they are, how they differ from laws passed in Congress, and how they’re checked by other branches and future administrations.

This episode features Professor Casey Dominguez from San Diego University.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: How Do Judicial Appointments and Elections Work?

Article III Justices- most justices at the federal level- are appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and serve for as long as they please with very few exceptions. This is done, in part, to ensure that they are independent of the political process. At the state level, however, things work differently. Judicial elections may be held to ensure accountability to the people. What do these differences mean for state and federal judiciaries?

Amy Steigerwalt of Georgia State University shows us the way.

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Archival: [00:00:01] After careful reflection, I am proud to nominate for associate justice of the Supreme Court, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the United States Court of Appeals for [00:00:10] the District of Columbia.

[00:00:11] Also, a contest of voters in Brooklyn will be weighing in on a very important one. It's for Surrogate's Court. The June 9th election serves as the general election for candidates for West [00:00:20] Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and inspiring woman who I believe will make a great justice, Judge Sonia Sotomayor of New York.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:35] You're [00:00:30] listening to Civics 101, I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:38] I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:39] Today, we are looking [00:00:40] into the very different ways that a justice gets on the bench at the state and federal level in the United States appointment and election.

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:00:48] Article III judges [00:00:50] follow the same process that other top officials do in the United States government.

[00:00:56] They are nominated by the president, by and with the advice [00:01:00] and consent of the Senate.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:01] This is Amy Steigerwalt, professor of political science at Georgia State University. She's been walking us through the judiciary lately.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:08] And when Amy says Article [00:01:10] III judges, we're talking about Article III of the Constitution. That's the article that says there shall be a Supreme Court. Congress can also make inferior courts and justices hold [00:01:20] office during good behavior, which is indefinitely in Congress has indeed established inferior federal courts.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:26] In the U.S. there are courts of appeals district courts [00:01:30] and there's a court of international trade. All told, there are currently in twenty, twenty eight hundred and seventy Article III judgeships. When someone [00:01:40] dies or retires, the president gets to appoint someone to fill that seat.

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:01:44] And the Senate confirms and the reason why they were given that they use this appointment process as well [00:01:50] as in this part of super important life tenure, that they serve for good behavior, cannot be removed from office involuntarily [00:02:00] except through either impeachment or death.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:03] I know the idea here is to have judicial independence, to have justices who won't be swayed by politics over the course of their career because [00:02:10] they don't have to appeal to the political landscape, like they don't have to prove themselves to parties or a voter. But you mentioned elections. So are there some judges in the country who have [00:02:20] to campaign?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:21] Yeah, starting in the 60s, 70s and 80s, states began to consider judicial elections in large part because they felt like there was simply no check on the justices [00:02:30] that had been appointed, that they were too disconnected from the people.

[00:02:34] There was no accountability.

[00:02:36] There was no ability to say you are doing a bad job [00:02:40] and therefore we want to get you out of office.

[00:02:43] And plenty of states have some form of judicial appointment for state courts, whether it's the governor appointing or a commission [00:02:50] or some combination of both, but plenty. Others hold traditional elections.

[00:02:55] There are states that just have competitive [00:03:00] judicial elections for their judges.

[00:03:03] Sometimes those are nonpartisan elections and sometimes they're partisan.

[00:03:08] There's also a special kind of election [00:03:10] that crops up in states that have an appointment process. This is called a retention election. A justice is appointed and then after some specified period of time, there's [00:03:20] a vote and that incumbent judge either gets to stay or is booted off.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:24] So with many states having elections where you vote for judges, have there been any moves to change how [00:03:30] things are done? And the Article three level?

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:03:32] The issue is that almost everyone agrees that it would take a constitutional amendment. And that, of course, is a really high bar. [00:03:40] And so the sort of leading advocates of changes or less about judicial elections and more about [00:03:50] either terms, sometimes it's about age limits or removal. But I would say probably the most prominent one that I've seen is actually less about switching to an election [00:04:00] system and more about putting in term limits. The people who would make the final determination on that would be, of course, the justices whose potential [00:04:10] seats would be in jeopardy.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:04:12] So will our federal justices ever be willing to make themselves less powerful if we ever get that far? You're at least guaranteed a Civics [00:04:20] 101 episode on it.

[00:04:21] If you have questions about government and politics, ask us by clicking the button at the top of our homepage at civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Are the Differences Among Constructionist, Originalist, and Liberal Supreme Court Justices?

How do Supreme Court Justices decide that something is in line with the Constitution or in violation of it? Supreme Court decisions depend on interpretations of the Constitution and the Justices don’t always agree! A Justice with an originalist stance may interpret the Constitution differently than a liberal Justice.

Amy Steigerwalt, professor of political science at Georgia State University, breaks it down for us.

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Adia Samba-Quee: [00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Antonin Scalia: [00:00:03] I don't care a fig for the framers. I care for the people that ratified the Constitution. What [00:00:10] was the meaning of the Constitution when the people ratified?

Stephen Breyer: [00:00:14] Look at those words. A state shall not deny any person equal protection of the laws through [00:00:20] the lens of what actually happened.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:23] That was the late Justice Antonin Scalia in conversation with Justice Stephen Breyer. And they're tackling [00:00:30] quite tactfully, I might add, a key difference in interpreting the Constitution. So we're going to do the same thing.

[00:00:36] This is Civics 101. I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:38] I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:39] And [00:00:40] today we're appealing it all the way up to the Supreme Court to answer a listener who asks, what's the difference between a justice, who is a strict textualist, a strict constructionist, [00:00:50] and the more liberal justices?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:53] Let's define our terms here, because I first need to understand what textualist constructionist actually means.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:00] A [00:01:00] constructionist is someone who approaches the words of the Constitution hyper literally, without thinking about the statute itself or how that word is approached in the legal [00:01:10] world.

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:01:10] That one is this idea that you read the words, that's it, you're done. And it sort of creates, in the words of Justice Scalia, [00:01:20] a judicial straitjacket because that's not how the world works.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:23] She says, by the way, that most political scientists hate the term constructionist because it doesn't really make sense.

[00:01:29] But [00:01:30] a textualist?

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:01:31] A textualist looks at the words that were used in the context of the statute. An originalist does [00:01:40] the same thing as a textualist, but wants to know what the words meant at the time the statute or constitutional provision was passed.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:49] Ok, [00:01:50] so a textualist is like focus on the words themselves and consider them in the context of the statute. And that's it. And an originalist, I'm glad you brought that term up, because we hear it a lot [00:02:00] when it comes to Supreme Court justices and Originalist says, yes, that and think about what was going on when this text was written.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:08] Yeah. And even within originalism, [00:02:10] there are some differences like does originalism mean that you define the terms in the Constitution based on what the framers would have thought and their definition at the time? Or is it based on what [00:02:20] the public would have thought and what they were reading in newspapers at the time?

Nick Capodice: [00:02:23] Alright. Now, if we think of originalist and textualist as more conservative interpretations of the Constitution, what is a liberal [00:02:30] interpretation mean?

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:02:31] A lot of the liberal justices would argue that, yes, it was written back then, but we're now existing in, in many [00:02:40] ways a different time. And so the words in order for it to still be useful, to not be that sort of straitjacket that Justice Scalia had talked about, we need [00:02:50] to recognize how the meaning of the words have changed. And sometimes if we were to, for example, hold to the [00:03:00] intent of those who wrote a provision, it would actually lead us to some weird outcomes.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:07] Amy brought up the 1964 Civil Rights [00:03:10] Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race and sex, and that conservative lawmakers included the terms and sex in there because [00:03:20] they thought that that would prevent the law from passing. Their intent was to kill the bill by including the hilarious, ridiculous idea of not discriminating [00:03:30] against, let's say, women. But then the act passed. Now, if you consider the intent of the people who wrote that act, you will also undermine the very [00:03:40] point of the act.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:41] As far as intent goes, I think that's pretty hard to pin down. The framers were arguing about the meaning of the Constitution before it was even ratified. [00:03:50]

Amy Steigerwalt: [00:03:50] So we had the Federalist Papers and the anti Federalists and they went back and forth in the newspapers at the time arguing over no right.

[00:03:59] If you say X, [00:04:00] it means this. And so even at the time, there was a lot of angst.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:04:07] That angst hasn't really gone away.

[00:04:10] It [00:04:10] now just falls into the hands of Supreme Court justices who attempt to make sense of things in the Constitution. That does it for this Civics 101.

[00:04:18] But if you have questions [00:04:20] about our government and politics, you can always click the button at the top of our home page to submit them at Civics 101 podcast dot org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: How Do Elections Rise to the Supreme Court?

Today we answer this listener question: “It has happened before that in very close elections, the Supreme Court chose the winner. How does that happen?”

Our guest is Dan Cassino, Professor of Government and Politics at Fairleigh Dickinson University. He walks us through two times the Supreme Court or its Justices were directly involved in choosing the winner of a presidential race.

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Civics 101

 [00:00:00] Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

[00:00:03] By pushing to get it done before midnight, it sounds from what we can make of the decision, Rehnquist and the four others [00:00:10] who joined him awarded the presidency to George Bush. And just one other question that I want to go back to.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:14] This is Civics 101. I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:16] And I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:17] And that audio is from a late night in December in 2000 [00:00:20] when numerous reporters stood in the cold, reading the Supreme Court decision of Bush v. Gore on the courthouse steps, trying their best to analyze it as quickly [00:00:30] as possible.

[00:00:30] Sorry, Peter. We're still trying to work out what the other is... And I don't think anybody should be saying, nobody should be embarrassed about trying to work on a Supreme Court ruling on the fly.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:38] Today we are answering [00:00:40] this listener question. "It has happened before that in very close elections, the Supreme Court chose the winner. How does that happen?" How does [00:00:50] it happen?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:50] I'm going to start by saying that it rarely happens. Two times in U.S. history, so far, the Supreme Court or its justices were directly involved [00:01:00] with deciding the winner of a presidential election. And we'll talk about both of those times. But let's start with what happens when a state's vote count is disputed.

Dan Cassino: [00:01:08] So the big insight here, [00:01:10] the thing everyone has to understand is that elections, like polls, have a margin of error around them.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:15] This is Dan Cassino, professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University.

Dan Cassino: [00:01:19] That is, and this [00:01:20] what we learned in the 2000 election, that if the race is close enough and by close enough, I mean that someone could theoretically say conceivably say, well, OK, but if you count the ballots this way, I won [00:01:30]. If it's to be counted this way, the other guy wins. So if you can get that margin, where they, where the change in how you're counting the ballots is going to affect the results at that point, [00:01:40] the election is a tie. And because of that, it is not going to result any more by the voters. It is resolved by elected officials and judges.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:49] When Dan [00:01:50] says elected officials, he means the secretary of state of that state, right?

Nick Capodice: [00:01:54] He does. And to be clear, the federal secretary of state deals with relationships with other countries. But in most states, [00:02:00] the state secretary of state is the one who deals with elections.

Dan Cassino: [00:02:03] In Bush v. Gore in 2000, the Supreme Court essentially said whoever the secretary of state says won the election, won the election, whether they actually won the election [00:02:10] or not.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:10] Bush v. Gore, 2000, which allowed the previous vote certification made by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris to call Florida for George W. [00:02:20] Bush. That is the only precedent we have to go on. And maybe we shouldn't even do that because it was what we call a narrow ruling. That term, by the way, has nothing [00:02:30] to do with how the justices voted. It means that the decision was written for as specific an instance as possible and that it is not likely to be used as precedent for future [00:02:40] cases.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:41] But what could get a state's vote to be challenged in court?

Dan Cassino: [00:02:45] If someone believes the secretary of state's actions are violating some important part of the Constitution, most [00:02:50] likely, probably the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides for equal protection under the laws. If you're treating people differently based on whose ballots you're gonna count, whose ballots are not being counted, well, in that case, you can sue. It's going to go to federal [00:03:00] court, to decide who the real winner is and how these things should be decided.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:05] You said there was a second time that the Supreme Court was involved. When was that?

Nick Capodice: [00:03:09] That was the election that [00:03:10] should be a whole podcast in itself, 1876 between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden. This dispute happened when the electors were chosen 40 days [00:03:20] after the election.

Dan Cassino: [00:03:21] When we had the electors come in, they registered their votes and Congress said, yeah, we think that was fraud here.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:27] So Congress put together a commission to decide [00:03:30] who got the electoral votes. And that commission included five Supreme Court justices. The commission also had one more Republican than a Democrat. Everybody voted on party [00:03:40] lines and they awarded those votes to Hayes.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:43] What does Dan think the process could be like here in 2020? Could it be another Hayes v [00:03:50] Tilden or Bush v. Gore?

Dan Cassino: [00:03:52] I've often argued that the present most similar to Donald Trump is in fact, Andrew Jackson. If Donald Trump loses and says this was fraud, I shouldn't have lost. [00:04:00] This is exactly Andrew Jackson argues in 1824. He doesn't just go away. He instead decides, no, I'm going to push forward. I don't care. I'm going to run again in 1828 and [00:04:10] I'm going to win that time. I'm not going to let this be taken away from me.

Nick Capodice: [00:04:16] That's elections and the Supreme Court. Remember, if you have any questions whatsoever [00:04:20] that you want us to ask our bevy of talented scholars, just go to civics101podcast.org and click ask a question.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: Will We Ever Get Rid of the Electoral College System?

The Electoral College is a system that serves as a buffer between we the people who vote, and the actual election of a president. The way this system works results in what some consider an unfair advantage for certain states and voters. But would we ever actually get rid of the Electoral College? What would that take? What are alternatives to the system?

Rebecca Deen, professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington, walks us through the what-ifs.

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Al Gore: [00:00:00] George W. Bush of the state of Texas has received for president of the United States two hundred and seventy one votes, Al Gore and the state of Tennessee has received [00:00:10] two hundred and sixty six votes.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:16] This is Civics 101. I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:18] I'm going to get Buttigieg.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:19] Today we [00:00:20] are tackling a big what if question that we got from a listener. They ask, what is the likelihood that we will get rid of the Electoral College system? Is anyone [00:00:30] actively working toward that goal?

Nick Capodice: [00:00:32] First things first. We should establish what it is we're actually talking about here.

Rebecca Deen: [00:00:36] First of all, it's not a college. It's not a place.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:38] This is Rebecca Deen, professor [00:00:40] of political science at the University of Texas at Arlington.

Rebecca Deen: [00:00:43] It is the process by which we formally choose the president.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:47] The Electoral College is a system. It's [00:00:50] a buffer between we, the people who vote and the actual election of a president.

Rebecca Deen: [00:00:56] When we go into the voting booth, we're not actually voting for that [00:01:00] person. We're voting for who that person's party have selected as a slate of electors. These people then [00:01:10] in December, they gather in their state, their state capitals, usually the state legislator, the Capitol building, and they vote.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:18] Part of the point of the Electoral [00:01:20] College is that in the event that the uninformed citizenry votes for, let's say, a tyrant, an elector can choose not to then vote for that person, [00:01:30] that would make them what's called a faithless elector, a fail safe in the event that the people choose poorly. We have had a handful of faithless electors over [00:01:40] the course of history, but never enough to actually prevent the winner from winning.

Nick Capodice: [00:01:44] And very quickly, let's talk about winning. The number of electors your state gets is based on population. There [00:01:50] are 538 total electors. So a really populous state gets a lot of electors like California with 55. But a low population state like Nebraska gets just [00:02:00] three. You need an absolute majority of those 538 electoral votes to win, making 270 the magic number.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:08] Now, why does anyone want to get rid of [00:02:10] the system? Well, it means that you can lose the nationwide popular vote by nearly one to four and still win the election. And [00:02:20] it means that swing states, states that could vote Democrat or Republican, get the most attention during the campaign.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:27] Basically, a lot of people say that because of all this, [00:02:30] the Electoral College doesn't give us an outcome that represents the will of the majority of voters. So let's get to that hypothetical now. What is the likelihood that we'll get rid of the Electoral [00:02:40] College? And is anybody actively working towards that?

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:43] And let's get one thing clear. The Electoral College is in the Constitution. So to get rid of it, [00:02:50] we'd have to have a constitutional amendment. Here's what that would take.

Rebecca Deen: [00:02:54] There are two stages, the proposal stage and the ratification stage. The proposal stage [00:03:00] takes two thirds of state legislatures or conventions hold by state legislatures to get a proposal off the ground. But [00:03:10] it takes three quarters for it to be ratified. The bar that the founding fathers set for changing the Constitution [00:03:20] is quite high.

Nick Capodice: [00:03:21] In other words, chances of actually abolishing the Electoral College are pretty slim. Lest we forget, though, the Constitution tells us another little something about how voting [00:03:30] should work in the U.S. that states are in charge of it.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:33] As of the publishing of this episode, 15 states and the District of Columbia have joined something called the National Popular [00:03:40] Vote Interstate Compact. If it goes into effect, it means that electors from the states who have joined it will vote for whoever won the popular vote nationally as opposed to just [00:03:50] in their state, essentially making the Electoral College moot. Combined, these states have 196 electoral votes, but the popular vote compact doesn't go into effect unless that number [00:04:00] reaches 270. The magic number supermajority they need more states to join on. And so for now, those states are sticking to the Electoral College process. [00:04:10] That does it for Ask Civics 101. But there are way more questions where that came from. And if you want to throw yours into the mix, we will find the answers. Just click the [00:04:20] link on our home page at civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Reconstruction: The Big Lie

Reconstruction has long been taught as a lost cause narrative.  The true story is one of great force. The great force of a powerful activist Black community that strived to establish a multiracial democracy and achieved great successes and political power. The great force of a violent white community that exploited, abused and murdered those of that Black community who would assert their civil and human rights. The great force of a federal government that was there and then wasn't. This episode is your introduction to that true story.

Our guides to this era are Dr. Kidada Williams, author of I Saw Death Coming and Dr. Kate Masur, author of Until Justice Be Done.

Replace with embed code from Sonix

---

Transcript

[copy/paste transcript here]

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Ask Civics 101: What Is a Concession Speech?

The concession speech marks the true end of a candidate’s campaign. There may have been a fight over the votes, there may have been recounts and lawsuits, but eventually there is a winner and there is a loser. What that loser says to their supporters is meant to be a reflection of a crucial American principle: the peaceful transition of power.

If you enjoy Civics 101, consider making a gift to help support the show!

---

Transcript

NOTE: This transcript was generated using an automated transcription service, and may contain typographical errors.

Archival: [00:00:00] Congratulations to Senator Kennedy for his fine race in this campaign and to all of. I [00:00:10] am, I am, I am sure I am sure his supporters are just as enthusiastic as you are for me.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:20] This [00:00:20] is Civics 101. I'm Hannah McCarthy.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:22] I'm Nick Capodice.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:22] And today we are talking about the hallmark of the peaceful transition of power in the United States.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:28] And that would be the concession [00:00:30] speech.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:30] Presidential elections end with a single winner and the other candidate eventually has to accept that fact.

Nick Capodice: [00:00:36] I just love the concession speech moment. It's one of those [00:00:40] few instances of graciousness and what can be a pretty rough race after all the work you've done to prove you're better than your opponent, to then have to say, well, the American [00:00:50] people and the Electoral College numbers have spoken. Good luck to my successful opponent.

[00:00:55] It must be pretty tough, but that's how we do it in this country.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:00:58] But to your point, [00:01:00] you never do hear the loser say I lost you barely ever hear the term concede. Actually, concession speeches are pretty much the same year after year. [00:01:10] They tend to follow a formula. Let's take Senator George McGovern. He was the Democratic nominee in 1972 and he lost to Richard Nixon. McGovern takes [00:01:20] the stage, looks out over a sea of media and supporters.

[00:01:25] And step one, he announces he has contacted and congratulated the winner of the [00:01:30] election.

Senator George McGovern: [00:01:30] And I have just sent the following telegram to President Nixon. Congratulations on your victory...

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:37]  Step two, try to soothe those disappointed [00:01:40] supporters.

Senator George McGovern: [00:01:40] But we're not going to shed any tears tonight about the great joy that this campaign has brought to us.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:48] Step three. Thank [00:01:50] everyone who got you to this point.

[00:01:52] Supporters and staff alike.

Senator George McGovern: [00:01:54] The glory days devoted working for.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:01:58]  Step four.

[00:01:59] And this one I truly [00:02:00] love, talk about the democratic process.

Senator George McGovern: [00:02:03] I ask you not to despair of the political process of this country.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:02:09] Step five, [00:02:10] remind everyone of the importance of a unified country.

Senator George McGovern: [00:02:13] The nation will be better because we never once gave up the long battle to renew [00:02:20] its oldest ideals and to redirect its current energies along more humane and hopeful path.

Nick Capodice: [00:02:27] Now, nothing says that the loser of an election [00:02:30] has to give a concession speech. But those last two steps you mentioned, Hanna, the reminder that this is how democracy works and that we have to stick together as a nation. Those have become essential [00:02:40] to tidying up post-election. The winner is the winner regardless of a concession speech. The point is for the loser to remind loyal supporters that [00:02:50] this is OK, that you all accept the results of these speeches do tend to come on election night itself. But when a race is really close, a candidate can hold out. [00:03:00] I remember this happening when George W. Bush and Al Gore brought a fight over the recount all the way to the Supreme Court in 2000. The court did order. The recount stopped and Gore finally [00:03:10] conceded five weeks after Election Day.

Al Gore: [00:03:12] And may God bless his stewardship of this country.

Hannah McCarthy: [00:03:18] Of course, there is a bitter sweetness to [00:03:20] it. As a supporter, you're watching with disappointment as your candidate bows out ideally gracefully and redirects the nation's eyes to their new or continued leader. Just [00:03:30] imagine what the candidate is feeling. All that money, energy, effort and time spent convincing people you were the one in what is considered one of [00:03:40] the lovelier concession speeches in American history. Democrat Adlai Stevenson summed it up as he conceded to Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 1952 presidential [00:03:50] election.

Adlai Stevenson: [00:03:50] I was reminded of a story that a fellow townsman of ours used to tell Abraham Lincoln, and they asked him how he felt one after unsuccessful election. [00:04:00] He said he felt like a little boy who had stubbed his toe in the dark and he was too old to cry, but it hurt too much to laugh. [00:04:10]

Hannah McCarthy: [00:04:12] That does it for concession speeches here on Civics 101 got a question about democracy, elections, power, government. [00:04:20] We will find the answer and get it to you posthaste. Click the link on our home page at civics101podcast.org.

---

Made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.