PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION REFORM

THE TWENTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATED OF AMERICA
INTRODUCTION
This document contains three parts. The first part focuses on the purpose of the proposed
amendment, as rational discussion is an essential element to a nation of laws and justice. The
second part focuses on the text of the proposed amendment itself, and is intended be somewhat
flexible for Congress to exercise prudent judgment to make minor changes to the specifics of the
process, without needing to undergo a lengthy constitutional amendment process. And lastly, the
third part focuses on suggestions for particular details of a law for Congress to adopt and
implement, in order to fulfill the requirements of the proposed amendments in a reasonable and
just manner.
PART I: THE AMENDMENTS PURPOSE
We, the American People, deserve better than our current presidential election process.
The presidential primary system is inherently flawed, and our Electoral College, although
positively novel at first implementation, and honorable in its intentions, over time has proved to
be a monumental stumbling block to a more free, forward-thinking society.
Our Constitution guarantees the people of every State a republican, or representative,
form of government, and if We the People of every State are entitled to a representative form of
government, it stands to reason that We the People of our nation are also collectively entitled to
such a government, especially when electing our President. But we have been robbed of this in
many respects, and we have been force-fed falsehoods that we must accept our political
surroundings, particularly with regard to our current presidential election system, but we must
reject that thinking.
The Declaration of Independence affirms that governments derive their just powers from
the consent of the governed. The same sacred and transcendent document also provides that if a
people are subjected to injustice and the suppression of their rights, it is not only their right, but
rather their duty, to throw off such a government, and to provide new guards for their future
security. Our governmental founders had the vision to make the Constitution a living one,
meaning that when we as a society have found that our current government, or government
processes, are contrary to the powers of justice, we must alter it, and institute new government

processes, in a way that we believe will be most likely to secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity.
Through amending the Constitution we have brought about several righteous changes,
such as but not limited to, the abolition of slavery, expanding the right to vote to all races,
genders, economic classes, and those of at least eighteen years of age. We have changed the way
U.S. Senators become elected, by direct vote of the people instead of being hand-picked by state
legislatures. We have altered the Electoral College once to give voice to the people of
Washington D.C. in electing our President. And lastly, we have already amended Presidential
voting and succession processes three times, and we must do so again.
Although we have certainly bolstered the muscle of justice with regard to WHO can vote
for President, and this is commendable, we have neglected to strengthen another essential muscle
with regard to HOW we vote for President. There is nothing overly precious about everyone
being allowed to vote for President, if the system that produces who we can vote for,
overbearingly favors the wealthy and politically-connected, those of firmly-established political
parties, and subjects us to selecting between the extremist factions of those political parties. This
is not to say that political parties and organizations do not have a place in a free society, because
the assuredly do.
But for generations, We the People have suffered repeated injuries every four years, as a
tyrannical and barbaric ritual rips away our heart of freedom from the body of our human
dignity. This is what necessarily compels us to alter our former system of electing our President.
To prove this, let facts be submitted to a rational nation:
-

The legislatures of almost all states have, within the bounds of the electoral college, fortified the
principle of all or nothing, meaning that if a presidential candidate received 51% of the vote,
and another candidate received 49%, the first would be granted all the states Electoral College
votes, while the second would receive none. This is not in the same universe as an election truly

based on representation.
Furthermore, because of the all or nothing principle, those Americans who vote against the
solid majority of people in their state, make the reasonable presumption that their vote for
President does not count, because frankly, it does not. In practice, a voter who supports a
presidential candidate that will is likely to only receive at most 33% of the states votes, feels like
their opinion is lost. This only adds to the problematic political trend of low voter turnout. Every

single vote should count toward something, even if it is a red fish in a sea of blue, or a bluebird
-

in a sunset of red.
The all or nothing principle also distorts the political relevance of voters in different states.
The voters in swing states, being states that could likely vote either majority Republican or
majority Democrat, have a greater role in determining the President of our country. Thus,
Presidential campaigning for the general election tends to focus on the particular set of swing
states, while tending to neglect the rest of the nation. Swing-state voters should be valued the
same as all others; they are not created superior. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL

are created equal.

The electoral college system naturally favors the candidates of the firmly-established political
parties, which impedes the growth and threatens survival of other parties that dream of
innovations. Certainly, there can be two national business-chains, but that does not mean we

should preserve a law that hampers local, entrepreneurial start-ups.

The natural political favoring of candidates of the dominant political parties, also gives rise to a
commercial and media favoring of those same candidates with respect to televised debates on the
issues. To privately exclude is their legal right, but that does not mean it is the moral one. The
grade-school epidemic of only caring about what the most popular kids have to say, seems to

live on in the adult world.

We must do our best in a constitutional manner, to combat the commercial and media tradition of
favoring dominant political party candidates on the debate stage, and one solution to do so is to
produce a nationally-visible, non-partisan forum, where the more-established party candidates
can meet with other candidates to discuss the most pressing issues facing our nation. In our
technologically-modern society where the internet is virtually free of charge, we desecrate our

Freedom of Speech if we choose not to do so.

Candidates who are resistant to participating in debates about the issues with more diversified
viewpoints, can demonstrate something about themselves, as the long records of history tend to
show that those unwilling to tolerate the civil opinions of others, are arrogant, insecure, or
tyrannical, none of which make one fit to be the leader of a free people. Truth and justice are

more likely to be found in environments where all are given a fair voice.
The Presidential primary systems of the two dominant political parties, are set up in a way that
increases the political power of the few states at the beginning, at the disadvantage of the rest of
the states. Even though its possible for them to have done much better nationally, candidates
who do not do well in the first or second state where primaries are held, tend to lose support,
both in terms of votes and financial backing. This essentially uproots potentially national-

blooming candidates before they even have a chance to break through the ground. The dilemma
is aggravated by the fact that it is typically the same first couple of states every Presidential
election cycle. But its not the fault of the people of these states, for they are just following their
-

consciences, its the system that is to blame.

We must address the two-fold primary system problem of (1) having too few of state primaries at
the beginning, and (2) having the same few states consistently hold their primaries at the
beginning. One solution to this issue would be to (1) increase the amount of state primaries at the
beginning and hold them on the same day, and (2) determine which states will hold primaries at
the beginning of the process by establishing either a random, or rotating system of selecting
those states, but not to base a rotating system on geographic area, as that could give rise to a

broad regional favoring of a specific candidate.

The current Presidential primary system, with one vote for one candidate, provides an undue
advantage to a party candidate who has a loyal following, but the majority oppose. This is
because the solid majority against that single candidate, can be split between several candidates.
For example, say candidate A only receives 25% of the primary vote, but candidates B, C, D, and
E split the remaining 75% somewhat equally, with roughly 18% each. Even if the 75% extremely
disliked candidate A completely, candidate A would become the partys nominee. This hazardous
system can generate candidates who are not truly representative, and it threatens the health of our

democratic process.
Both through the primary process and the general election, our two-party system with the
Electoral College system as its accomplice, has historically coerced us to elect a President who is
of one political extreme or another. Instead of selecting a right-wing candidate for a time, and
then left-wing to balance us out, would it not be more wise to make it easier for a more
moderate, generally appealing candidate to become President? Electing a more moderate
President would also help the Supreme Court maintain a healthy homeostatic balance. Society
thrives with positive improvements, but also with stability. Why should we consume hot scalding
soup, or near-frozen soup, when we could enjoy a bowl at a perfect, pleasing temperature? The
first two taste of slavery, and the latter freedom.
Our Presidential primary process, and the Electoral College, have become a cancerous
tumor that has metastatically come to deeply affect citizens not only at the national level, but
state and local as well. We must remove them both in order to heal. They have fostered extremist
division and a feeling of chronic hopelessness. But those traits are not who we have been as a

people, nor who we are at present, nor does it reflect our potential. We are the UNITED States of
America; united we stand and divided we fall. This is not a partisan, nor a politically ideological
issue, but rather it is an American, a human issue. We must improve and renew our liberty
through action.
The American Revolutionary Thomas Paine published, a long habit of not thinking a
thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a
formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts
than reason. It is imperative to keep this in mind with respect to this amendment.
It is proposed that the one vote for one candidate practice in the party primary system,
and the Electoral College and its all or nothing practice, be abolished, and replaced with a
Presidential point system, with the same basic award system being used to select the winners of
the party primaries, and the general election. The award system is as follows:
-

Each registered voter for the party primary and the general election shall be entitled to three
votes, each with a differing point value, a three-point vote, a two-point vote, and a one-point

vote.
The voter shall be entitled to grant their three-point vote to their most preferred candidate, their
two-point vote to their next most preferred candidate, and then their one-point vote to the next

most preferred candidate.

A voter reserves the right to discard their votes if they do not wish to support another candidate,

but a voter cannot use more than one vote for the same candidate.
At the end of the primary process, and the general election, whichever candidate that nationally
received the most total points, not total votes, shall be declared the winner.
This point system would advance the cause of justice in at least the following ways:
(1) The opinion of every voter would count towards something, even if they voted
contrary to the solid-majority of their state.
(2) It would prevent a majority-opposed candidate from winning a primary by merely
having the largest loyal following and the majority splitting their first preference among several
candidates, diminishing the effect of split-tickets;
(3) Strengthen the success of candidates who may have more moderate views, but more
importantly more views in common with voters than any other candidate, by enabling them to
receive something to show for their voter support. For example, even if candidate A and
candidate B both got 45% of the three-point votes, if all voters who granted their three-point

votes to candidates A or B, granted their two-point votes to candidate C, then candidate C would
likely end up with the most points, and win the election, because it has been demonstrated that
more people collectively support that candidate over another.
(4) Even if a particular more moderate candidate did not win, their demonstration of
success would indicate the level of support from the national population, and should be utilized
by the incoming President and Congress to measure the popular support of the general principles
and issues that candidate represented.
(5) In addition, as every voters opinion would count in practice, and visible national
support would be documented, it could demonstrate the support for the policies of not only a
candidate, but their political party if they have one. This would bolster the free market principle
of competition, and lead to a more civically engaged nation.
Some may argue that the party primary system is a private matter of association, and it is
not the role of government to regulate it. This argument is fallacious. How is it not the role of
government to preserve the sanctity of the democratic process? Furthermore, there are already at
least six initial sections of our Constitution, and at least nine Amendments to our Constitution,
that govern our election process.
Others will say that what is proposed is too complicated, but as all new concepts take
time to adjust to, it is much better to have a more just, initially more complex process, than to
suffer under a flaw-filled simpler system. While it may be too burdensome to do this same
process in state and local elections, it is not too much for the only truly nationally-elected
officials, the President and Vice President of our country.
There will also be those already established with power, that believe a change in the
status quo will affect their retention of that power and influence. They are correct, because it
certainly will, and that is the exact problem we are trying solve, that of too much power in too
few hands. Whether the power is sought out or inherently granted by the system, it makes no
difference.
We the American People have a solemn responsibility to our ancestors, our posterity, and
ourselves, to ensure that the leader of the free world is one that truly represents what the majority
of us stand for. These values encompass: tolerance, inclusion, transparency in government,
accepting ones mistakes, the separation of powers, and most importantly, love. Again, the
Declaration of Independence states that governments derive their just powers from the consent
of the governed. There lies the terrible truth. Our consent has led us here. By acceptance, or more

likely inaction, we have enabled oppressive powers to temporarily prevail, with no moral or
reasonable excuse.
Thomas Paine also stated with regard to American representative government, that the
Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth. This proposed Amendment intends to, through the
lense of justice and reason, highlight and refine this cause of the greatest worth, which is that we
shall have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and that it shall not
perish from the earth. Let us not remain silent and let us promptly act, because we are the ones
who empower the government through our consent. We have the legal right, and we know it is
the moral right. Thus shall the Star-Spangled banner in triumph still wave, oer the land of the
free and the home of the brave.
PART II: THE AMENDMENT ITSELF
Section 1. The system of electing the President and Vice President of the United States by
Electors is hereby abolished. The system of Electors shall be replaced by a point system.
Section 2. Under the Presidential point system, every citizen of the United States who is eligible
to vote in their jurisdiction shall be entitled to three votes, each with a differing point value, a
three-point vote, a two-point vote, and a one-point vote. The voter shall be entitled to grant their
three-point vote to their most preferred Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate pair, their
two-point vote to their next most preferred candidate pair, and their one-point vote to the next
most preferred candidate pair. A voter reserves the right to discard any of their votes, if they do
not wish to do so, but a voter cannot use more than one vote for the same candidate pair.
Section 3. All eligible votes from the general election shall be counted and points awarded, with
three points being awarded to a candidate pair for every three-point vote point, and two points
for every two-point vote, and one point for every one-point vote. The points shall then be totalled
from the nation, and the candidate pair with the greatest amount of collective points shall become
the next President and Vice President, but only if the candidate pair has received at least thirty
percent of the total points, and leads all other candidate pairs by at least three whole percent of
the total points.
Section 4. In the general election, if no candidate pair shall have received at least thirty percent
of the points, or no candidate pair leads all other candidate pairs by at least two whole percent of

the total points, then the newly elected House of Representatives shall, no sooner than two weeks
after the election, from the top three candidate pairs select the next President and Vice President,
and each voting member of the newly elected House of Representatives shall receive one vote. A
quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and
a majority of all voting Representatives shall be necessary to a choice.
Section 5. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right
of choice shall devolve upon them, by the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the
President, then the guidelines provided in the Twentieth Amendment shall be followed.
Section 6. The Senate President pro tempore shall, by June of the year prior to a Presidential and
Vice Presidential Election, appoint a Presidential Election Commission consisting of seven
members of either the Senate, the House of Representatives, or both. However, no more than
three of its members shall be of the same political party, and a majority vote shall be required to
rule on all matters.
Section 7. The Presidential Election Commission shall maintain the sanctity of the democratic
process and free ideas, by administering the Presidential party primary system, and facilitating
formal Presidential and Vice Presidential debates, in a manner that also allows Due Process for
the rights inherent in the Constitution, specifying but not limited to the freedoms of speech,
expression, and association. With the authority given to them by Congress, the Presidential
Election Commission shall:
(1) Determine, in a reasonable manner given the resources and technology at the time, the topfive most supported political parties throughout the nation;
(2) Implement the Presidential point system to nationally determine the victors of the
Presidential primaries of the top-five political parties, provided that all voters in party primaries
are registered members of that political party;
(3) Ensure that the formal debates for the top-five party primaries are carried out in a manner
conducive to a republican form of government and a pure democratic process;
(4) If a top-five political party desires, the Presidential Election Commission shall provide a
reasonable forum for their candidates to debate prior to each primary round, and the Commission

shall film and reasonably broadcast the debate in its entirety, in a manner that reflects the
resources and technology at the time;
(5) Direct the top-five Presidential party primaries to be held in primary rounds. All top-five
party primaries shall be held on the same day for a given state. The rounds shall consist of at
least one-fifth of states and other U.S. jurisdictions at a time, but no more than one-third, and the
order of the collection of states going shall not be consistent each Presidential cycle, nor shall a
round of states be strictly based on geographic region, nor shared industrial or economic
interests. This shall be done so that all top-five party primaries shall have selected a Presidential
candidate by June of the year of the election;
(6) Allow victors of party primaries to select their own Vice Presidential running mates;
(7) Ascertain, by June of the year of the election, in a reasonable manner given the resources and
technology at the time, the two most nationally-supported candidates, who have in the year of the
election demonstrated no political party affiliation, and declare them certified independent
candidates, instructing them to also select Vice Presidential running mates, if they have not
already done so; and
(8) Facilitate at least three official Presidential candidate debates, and at least one Vice
Presidential debate, between the candidates of the top-five political parties, together with the
two most nationally-supported candidates, who have in the year of the election demonstrated no
political party affiliation. These debates shall take place prior to the last week of the October
before the election, but no sooner than June that same year.
Section 8. Any candidate, whether for President or Vice President, of a top-five political party, or
who is part of one of the two most nationally-supported candidate pairs, shall be on the ballot in
any state or jurisdiction where any other candidate is found.
Section 9. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions
of this article.
PART III: SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE AMENDMENT
By the authority granted by the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, the Presidential Election Committee shall be created, and perform its duties according to
the following timeline:

Section 1. By June 1st of the year prior to a Presidential election

The Senate President Pro Tempore shall appoint the seven members of the Presidential Election
Commission in accordance with the Twenty-Eighth Amendment.
Section 2. By August 1st of the year prior to a Presidential election
The Presidential Election Commission shall:
(1) Following Part 1 of Section 7 of the Twenty-Eighth Amendment, determine, in a reasonable
manner given the resources and technology at the time, the top-five most supported political
parties throughout the nation. This could be accomplished by the analysis of recent party
registration records, scientific statistical polling, or a combination.
Section 3. By September 1st of the year prior to a Presidential election
The Presidential Election Commission shall:
(1) Administer the commencement of the process of signature gathering, both for candidates wishing
to run in a party primary, and candidates seeking certified independent status. No signatures
gathered prior to when a candidate has filed an intent to run shall be considered valid.
(2) Ensure that signatures are gathered in a reasonable manner, with in-person signatures of support
of a candidate requiring a full legal name & generally a physical address, and electronic
signatures requiring the same, but also a separate email address per supporter. Each signer shall
affirm with their signature, under penalty of perjury, that they are a citizen of the United States
and an enfranchised voter in the State in which they reside.
(3) Assert that in order to sign in support of any candidate running in a party primary, a citizen must
be a registered member of that political party. However, registered members of a political party
can sign for as many different candidates within their party as they so desire. Also, any
enfranchised citizen is eligible to sign in support of a candidate seeking certified independent
status, regardless of the citizens political affiliation, or whether they have signed in support of a
candidate running in a party primary.
Section 4. By November 1 of the year prior to a Presidential election
The Presidential Election Commission shall:
(1) Under Part 5 of Section 7 of the Twenty-Eighth Amendment, come to a resolution about in which
combination of states, and in what order, shall the top-five party primaries be held. This could be
done by entering all States and other jurisdictions under the government of the United States,

into a lottery, randomly selecting out the first group of states for the primary rounds, and doing
so until all have been selected.
(2) And under Part 3 of Section 7 of the Twenty-Eighth Amendment, announce the order and dates
of the top-five party primary debates, with each being on a separate date, and this could also be
done using a lottery system. This shall be done for a party primary debate at least three days prior
to each primary round, but no sooner than fourteen days prior to each primary round.
Section 5. On the first weekday after December 1st of the year prior to a Presidential
election
All signature gathering records for candidates seeking a top-five party nomination shall have
been submitted and provided for official verification.
Section 6. No later than December 15th of the year prior to a Presidential election
The Presidential Election Commission shall publish the official tallies of signature gathering for
top-five party candidates, and up to the top seven candidates of each of the top-five parties shall
be considered certified party candidates, they alone shall continue with the top-five party primary
process. Individuals who sought certified party candidacy, but did not obtain it, can now file
formal papers indicating their intent to run for certified independent status, however they must
obtain all signatures anew after they have filed as an independent candidate.
Section 7. By January 15th of the year of the Presidential election
With the context being Part 2 of Section 4 of this law, the top-five political parties shall have
informed the Presidential Election Commission whether they have secured an agreement with a
broadcast forum to record and publish their party primary debate prior to the first round. If a
party has not found broadcast forum for their debate, the Presidential Election Commission shall
arrange one as stipulated in Part 4 of Section 7 of the Twenty-Eighth Amendment. A top-five
political party may elect to hold no debate prior to a primary round, but if at least one certified
party candidate desires to answer questions about issues, the Presidential Election Commission
shall arrange a forum with the same respect as to a debate, and any certified candidate of that
same party is welcome to join, but no candidate shall be compelled to attend.
Section 8. On dates between January 16th and January 31st

According to Section 4 of this law, the Presidential Election Commission shall ensure a party
primary debate for each top-five party, at least three days prior to each primary round, but no
sooner than fourteen days prior to each primary round.
Section 8. On a date between February 1st and February 10th
The Presidential Election Commission shall:
(1) Supervise the first round of party primaries in accordance with Part 5 of Section 7 of the TwentyEighth Amendment, and consistent with Part 1 of Section 4 of this law.
(2) Not make publicly available any official tallies of the points received by any candidate, whether
partial or complete, and regardless of jurisdiction, until 8pm Pacific Time the night of the
primary round, or until voting booths have closed in the last jurisdiction holding a primary that
day, whichever is sooner.

The First Tuesday in January on or after the 4th: Signatures for Party Primaries must be

officially submitted to the Presidential Election Committee by 8pm Pacific Time, by way of
voteusa.gov

The Thursday two days after the party primary signature process closes, the PEC shall

announce what parties are considered the top five in terms of registered voters. The states and
jurisdictions will then become aware of which and enter the parties in terms of registered voters
into a lottery selection, and then the order of party primary debates and their respective dates
shall be determined and announced.

On the Thursday two days after the party primary signature process closes. Another lottery

process shall be performed on this date, but which will include all fifty states, and U.S.
territories, as much as possible, equally divided into four groups. The first fourth of states and
jurisdictions shall facilitate party primaries for at least the first five political parties in terms of
registered voters on the first Tuesday of February, the second fourth of jurisdictions on the first
Tuesday of March, the third the first of April, and the fourth the first Tuesday of May.

Second-to-last Wednesday & Thursday, and Last Tuesday, Wednesday, & Thursday of

January, February, March, and April: Prior to each round of party primaries, up to the top seven
signature-supported candidates from each top-five political party will be given a chance to
debate, and this will include the top five political parties in terms of registered voters. Political
parties can arrange with media stations to broadcast their debate in advance, but the political
party debate can only be on the day specified by lottery, and no money or item of tangible value

shall be given by political parties or their party officials, to the television network, for their time
of airing the debate. If no nationally-televised television network shall accept a political party on
their given debate night, the PEC shall arrange a high-quality broadcast, live and recorded, to be
live on C-SPAN and uploaded onto common online media forums, including at least the House
of Representatives Youtube channel, and the House of Representatives Facebook page.

Each round of the party primary process shall be accomplished using a process called the

Presidential Point System. For each political party, up to the top seven candidates from
signatures submissions who are still formally in the race. Each registered voter for a party,
regardless of whether they are a resident of a state or reside in a U.S. jurisdiction shall be given
three votes, each constituting a differing point value, a 3-point vote a 2-point vote, and a 1-point
vote. Granting a candidate a higher point value demonstrates that a registered voter prefers that
candidate over others. Thus, a registered voter may grant their most-liked candidate their 3-pt
vote, then their next most-liked candidate their 2-point, and then their next most-liked candidate
their 1-point vote. A voter cannot use more than one vote on the same candidate, and appropriate
measures shall be taken to combat this, either digitally by having the 3-pt candidate or 2-pt
candidate removed from the following screens, or by human evaluation of a voters physical
ballot. However, a registered voter reserves the right to waive granting any vote of any point
value, if the conscience of that voter compels them not to. Those points then remain unawarded
and not attributed to any candidate.

Government point tallies of each primary round, whether partial or complete, and whether

from any jurisdiction, shall not be made publicly available until the primary polls have closed at
8pm Pacific Time.

After each primary round, party candidates have until the Friday ten days after each round to

submit a formal withdrawal from the race. Party candidates who withdraw by this deadline after
the first primary round, remain eligible to gather certified independent candidate vote signatures.
Party candidates who do not withdraw prior to this deadline after the first primary round, are
ineligible to be a certified independent candidate.

The primary round process continues for each political party through the final round of

primaries in May, or until only one candidate from that political party remains. If only one
candidate ends up remaining, then that candidate becomes the partys nominee. However the
primary process for a party does last until May, the candidate with the highest cumulative point
value becomes that partys nominee.

After the last round of party primaries in May, the Presidential nominees for the top-five

political parties shall be known.

When a Presidential nominee for a top-five political party has been determined, whether it be

because of their lone candidacy or by the Presidential point system, political parties can hold
what has been historically called a party convention, in whatever manner and in whatever
location they desire. Party conventions serve rather as political events, rather than an essential
step in the election process.

By the fourth Tuesday in May, at 8pm Pacific Time, the top-five nominees, shall have

formally submitted documents to the PEC naming their Vice Presidential running mates.

By the first Tuesday June in at 8pm Pacific Time, the signatures supporting those wishing to

become certified-independent candidates must be officially submitted.

On the first Thursday in June, the Presidential Election Committee shall announce the names

of the two independent candidates with the highest amount of signature support who are still
seeking candidacy, and thus declare them certified-independent candidates. The

By the fourth Tuesday in June, at 8pm Pacific Time, the two certified independent

candidates, shall have formally submitted documents to PEC naming their Vice Presidential
running mates.

The Presidential Election Committee shall arrange a debate for the top-seven Presidential

candidates on the second Tuesday of July, August, and October, and a Vice Presidential debate on
the second Tuesday of September. unless due to a threat, natural, domestic, or foreign, and
wisdom requires that it be scheduled for a different date, and/or different city later that same
month.

The general election for President of the United States shall then take place as stipulated by

the Constitution, being the first Tuesday following a Monday in November, and every ballot
shall have at least the names of the top-seven candidate pairs, not to exclude other non-certified
independent or write-in candidates that have followed the proper channels to be placed on the
ballot in that jurisdiction.

And following the party primary voting process, of the primary rounds, Government point

tallies of the general presidential election, whether partial or complete, and regardless of
jurisdiction, shall not be made publicly available until the polls have closed at 8pm Pacific Time.

Presidential point tallies for the general election shall be calculated by the same means as

the party primary process using a process called the Presidential Point System. Each registered

voter, regardless of whether they are a resident of a state or reside in a U.S. jurisdiction shall be
given three votes, each constituting a differing point value, a 3-point vote a 2-point vote, and a 1point vote. Granting a candidate a higher point value demonstrates that a registered voter prefers
that candidate over others. Thus, a registered voter may grant their most-liked candidate their 3pt vote, then their next most-liked candidate their 2-point, and then their next most-liked
candidate their 1-point vote. A voter cannot use more than one vote on the same candidate, and
appropriate measures shall be taken to combat this, either digitally by having the 3-pt candidate
or 2-pt candidate removed from the following screens, or by human evaluation of a voters
physical ballot. However, a registered voter reserves the right to refrain from granting any vote
of any point value, if the conscience of that voter compels them not to. Those points then remain
unawarded and not attributed to any candidate.

After the Presidential point tallies have been completed, the candidate-pair with the most

points shall become President and Vice President, respectively, as long as that candidate-pair
received at least a third of all points granted, and that candidate-pair leads all others by at least
2% of the total points.

If no candidate pair receives at least one third of all points granted, or no candidate-pair leads

all others by at least 2% of the total points, then the newly elected members of the House of
Representatives shall convene a special session by December 5 of the election year, but no
sooner than a week after the general election. This special session shall, from the three topscoring candidate-pairs from the general election, cast their votes for their desired candidate pair,
with each voting member of the House of Representatives receiving one vote. In the event that
this vote result in two candidate-pairs leading equally, whichever candidate-pair received the
most 3-pt votes in the general election shall become President and Vice President. And as the
proposed Amendment states, if the House of Representatives shall not have chosen a candidatepair by inauguration day, the immediately previous Vice President shall then become President.
CONCLUSION
We have allowed the sore of our current presidential system alone too long and it has
become a hemorrhaging, infected open wound. We must first come to know that a governments
power is derived from the peoples consent. We must then act upon that knowledge. It is our duty
to utilize the Constitution as it was intended, as it is a living document, and recognize that it is

not only our right, but our duty, to alter it and replace it, providing new guards for our future
security.
Let us remember that we are a diverse people, all with unique experiences and
perspectives, and that we must put into a place a system that is more likely to produce candidates
that better reflect that. We need to implement a system where it is more likely for more moderate,
unifying candidates to be elected as President. We have 538 voting members of Congress,
representing all different religions, races, economic class, and workers of different industries,
and they each have a voice to contribute. They represent all of us, but yet more often than not,
our Presidential choices are typically between two candidates of increasingly stark political
opposites.
Our past suffering urges us to institute a better process, to implement a system where it is
more likely for more moderate, unifying candidates to be elected as President. Replacing the
obsolete Electoral College with a Presidential Point System would enable the more moderate
majority to have a greater say in who becomes President, instead of having both arms torturously
pulled in a game of tug of war by political extremes.
Each American generation is meant to add to the glorious cause of liberty, refining it for
future generations. We must have our own American renewal. Let us make the Presidential Point
System one of our generations most cherished improvements, in order to secure the blessings of
liberty to ourselves and our posterity. And finally, let us do so in the same spirit of the signers of
the Declaration of Independence, which reads, And for the support of this Declaration, with a
firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives,
our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.