|
MESSAGE BOARD 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?
Page 8 How about we make the World Series (or the ALCS) based on points alone, rather than games won? That's pretty much analogous to abolishing the Electoral College. Teams that could get a lot of runs would win, just like major cities would dominate. You'd lose the idead of a "battleground state", and never see a candidate outside of a major metro area. Jason, Lexington I think the reasons for the Electoral College are still valid. It may be true that the implementation needs to be revisited, but there are issues which affect rural states with far fewer people, which the vast majority of people don't know or care about--they need representation too, despite the fact there are many more people in the highly-populated states. The Electoral College is an attempt, same as the Legislature, to balance the significance of the individual voter (the # of E.C. votes from the Representatives) and the significance of states (the votes for Senators). I might suggest the proportional division of Electoral College votes, the way Colorado is doing, since I think it's more significant that an extremely close result in one state can create a difference of 20 votes to go in either direction currently, but I think the validity of the Electoral College system still has merit. Stephen, Somerville After reading a few more responses, I had to add something--the existence of the Electoral College for casting the "real" votes for president is not the issue that many people are yelling about. The existence of the Electoral College isn't why a close vote in one state means all its votes go to a single candidate. That's purely the implementation of the division of the state's Electoral votes. Obviously that's not fixed in stone, since Colorado is voting this year to divide up their votes proportionally between the candidates based on the votes they receive at the polls. Of course, having a mixed bag of Electoral vote methods is probably not a very healthy thing either--it really ought to be consistent throughout, because something like Colorado's proposal while the rest of the nation votes all or nothing will throw off the balance. I think the states really should divide up their electoral votes by the results of the popular vote, but continue to have the electoral votes due them by the current method. Stephen, Somerville No, the electoral college should not be abolished. It was designed so the most popuous states or regionof the country don't have to much power selecting a president. Steve, Medford It's well past time to lose the electoral college. I have long believed that a vote should equal a vote. Especially with the whole drama of the 2000 elections... if people are truly concerned about their vote not counting, then *vote*... I think you would also find that, proportionally, the people in the cities probably vote less those out in rural spaces (having lived there)... the feeling with the E.C. is why bother - these folks decide my vote no matter what I choose... whereas a vote-for-vote count would change that. Every vote would actually matter! Heather, Boston It's no wonder the democrats want to abolish the elctoral college. Without it, our presidents will get elected based on the popular vote, for the most part, in major urban centers like New York, LA, Chicago etc... Major urban centers almost entirely vote for a democratic candidate But, for those of us who don't live in the inner city, and choose to vote for something other than a democrat, the electoral college is the only way for our voice to be heard. It's easy for people to say that elections should be based on a poplur vote, particularly by those who don't know what they are talking about. But if one really looks into this issue and realizes what the electoral college was set up for, AND, looks at the typical voting demographics in this country, they will realize that abolishing it would create a one sided system the likes of which we have never seen mark, NH The electoral college is out-dated and needs to be shelved permanently. The time has come to do away with a system that undermines the fundamental tenants of our great nation. That is, a nation that is ruled by the will of the people. Faceless electors are circumspect and completely contrary to the popular will. To allow such a system to continue is to invite more of the controversy -- bitter controversy -- that we saw in 2000. It is the inherent duty of this country's government to ensure that America remains progressive. Such progressiveness is put by the wayside when an individual wins the presidency on the whims of faceless electors. This practice -- this archaic electoral college -- is the Achilles' heel of the American democratic political system. When all other elected members of our government -- representatives and senators -- are chosen by popular vote, would it not be prudent to ensure the highest office in the land is chosen in the same manner? One would certain think so, and any reasonable person would know so. It is a mockery of our political system to allow our president to be elected contrary to the will of the people. After all, this is still America, yes? A government of the people, for the people, by the people would never allow this nefarious system to continue to linger in the air like some offensive and decaying odor. I will have a political career, and I can most definitely say that I will seek to get rid of this offensive mechanism in the American political system. Joel, Lawton, OK Keep the institution. I'm from a small state (ND) and the Electoral College levels the playing field. Neither the West nor East coast states care a hoot about the middle of the country. The urban popular voting hegemony would be an unparalleled disaster on the majority of smaller states in the Union. Wilvus, Pembroke The electoral college has it purposes. In a country that advocates states rights, if we do not have an electoral college, we lose states rights. Why should 20 states have more power than 30 states? If we were to go to a straight vote, then we need to purge all voter roles and start fresh, and demand ID in order to vote, part of the purpose of the elctoral college was to prevent ballot box stuffing (a few cities have more registered voters than people that are eligble to vote). We ask for ID to do almost anything in this country, asking for it at the ballot box should be no different. How about this: a three pronged election. You must win 2 out 3 steps. The first is the electoral college, the second is popular vote, the third is number of states won. If you have the most in two of the three, you win. Why is it I have a feeling that if Al Gore had won his homestate in 2000, we would not even be having this story or discussion? Look at our own state, John Kerry may be elected President and if he is, by law the Governor names his replacement, some people don't like this, so they want to change the law, I bet these are the same people that are crying about the electoral college. Craig, Hanson It should be abolished immediately. The argument for the Electoral College is that popular elections would be decieded by more heavily populated areas and that's not fair. Unfortunately, democracy is not fair. The nature of democracy is the majority decides and everyone else has to deal with it. By abolishing the electoral college, Americans would be free to choose our leaders based on the values of the majority. Adam, Revere
|
Read the story: 
