Is it time to get rid of the Electoral College?

In "Peculiar institution," Alexander Keyssar describes the nearly successful effort to get rid of the Electoral College in 1969-70 and suggests that its survival may owe more to the legacy of slavery, and the political power of the South, than to efforts by small states to preserve any mathematical advantage. After the experience of the 2000 election, and the prospect of a repeat this November, has the time finally come to abolish the Electoral College? Who stands to gain? Who to lose?
Read the story: Peculiar institution
Share your thoughts

Page 11

After what happened during the last presidentail election, I truly believe that it is time to do away with the electoral college. Using the popular vote seems like a more realistic election.

Chrissy, Boston

The Great Compromise holds our country together, but the Electoral College should be modified so that the votes of the Electors are divided proportionally to most closely represent the popular vote. This could be done individually by the states, but it's causing our country so many problems I would rather see it fixed more expediently by the feds.

Brian, Boston

It should be abolished. The electoral college does more damage to the election process than good. It biggest effect is enforcing a two party system in America. Independent candidates will never get a fair chance. In the 1992 election, almost 20% of the country voted for an indenpendent candidate yet not one got a single electoral vote. I think it also causes side effects in voting - why bother voting in Massachusetts for George Bush or in Texas for John Kerry? Its practically a wasted vote. We need a system that reflects accurately the will of all the people.

Dana, Jamaica Plain

It is long past time to abolish the Electoral College. This antiquated system is anti-democratic and stands as a testament to the Founding Fathers' mistrust of the people. It should be abolished before it taints yet another election.

Eric, Sherman, CT

The Electoral College is clearly a problematic system. While we do need some system to ensure that small states have a voice equal to their size, the electoral college is not the answer. The primary problem is that the people in the College are not elected officials and theoretically have the power to give their electoral vote as they see fit and there is no mechanism to control them. We are currently trusting that they will vote true to the majority of their state. More important of course than problems with the College however are the increasing incidents of voter registration fruad nad intimidation. What we truly need is an international monitor to ensure that our elections are legitimate which after 2000 is clearly not as sure as we'd like to think. If we insist on sending election monitors to other democracies why shouldn''t our own be monitored?

Ned, JP

Of course the system should go. Votes should be equal. New York's vote should equal Boston's vote should equal Peoria's vote. I live in Texas and I am wasting my time voting this time around - my vote doesn't count.

Mike, Austin

The electoral college was put in place by our founding fathers to mitigate the problems of the previous famous democracies, Rome and Athens. Athens failed as a democracy when mob rule took over, culminating in the execution of Socrates. The upper class was at the mercy of popular rule. They could be ostracized at any time. There was no stability. The experience of successful men became their undoing. Rome tried to strike a balance with the institution of the Senate. The aristocracy shared power with the plebeians. They maintained the experience and wealth of the upper classes, while oppression from the upper class was mitigated by the voting power of the plebeians. Consuls came from both the upper and lower classes. But when the empire grew, the need for a strong leader undid the democracy. Shared annual consular authority was not enough to guarantee stability for Rome's borders. Caesar marched on Rome and ended the Republic. When he was assassinated Augustus took over the institutions that governed Rome, declaring himself as the Tribune to the people. He was backed by the plebeians. The cowardly senate did not oppose him. Version three of the democracy sought to remedy these problems. First the executive branch would last longer than a year. Four years of strong rule would be enough to govern the state and protect her borders. In the event that the populace would wish for an end to the republic, the electoral college would prevent a coup by standing up for the rights of the upper class and so prevent the institution of a Caesar. The lack of an electoral college produced the likes of Napoleon and Adolph Hitler. It takes an astute student of history to get rid of the electoral college, if such a one can see further than the founding fathers did.

Albert, Wayland

The states elect the President. It has worked that way for over 200 years. Get over it.

Eric, Medford

It was time to get rid of it 40yrs ago. It helps no one.

Ray, Cottonwood Az.

If the electoral college is not abolished in favor of a truly democratic one person-one vote system, then electoral votes should be awarded to candidates on a congressional district basis. Kerry carries Suffolk, Norfolk and Essex county, he gets those electoral votes. Bush gets Plymouth, Franklin and Barnstable county, he gets those electoral votes.

Ray, Canton