Back at it with the electoral college
The last time I "blogged" was in 2010. The world did not end with the second coming of GW but I rearranged my personal finances and didn't lose any money in the great recession. I'm starting up again primarily because I tend not to forget arguments after I write them down and the act of writing them down helps to clarify my thinking. Feel free to read these entries but do not get the impression that I'm doing this for any type of external reactions.
Ok, that's over with...the election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was extremely telling on many fronts but the one I want to key into here is the electoral college and the role it's playing in US politics. I very well can see why the electoral college was established. It was an enticement for less populated territories to join the federation. It was a promise to them that they would have influence in federal matters. It was probably a pretty good system when voting rights were limited and technology had not yet evolved to allow all of the people's votes to be counted.
My contention is that, in recent history, the electoral college system has diverged from being consistent with the actual popular vote (all of those illegal immigrant votes cast aside) which used to be a very rare event. As Stephen King's character Roland in the Dark Tower Series was fond of saying, "The world has moved on." While I think this statement rings true for nearly all of our constitution, it's especially the case for the electoral college. You have to ask yourself whether it's really needed? If you can count every single ballot cast, why the convoluted machinations of the electoral college? I would think conservatives would resonate with it's elimination on the grounds that it reduces bureaucracy and complexity- they seem to like simple- and eliminating this step would certainly simplify things.
The argument that is made against eliminating it is usually that the less populated states would then not have as much influence as they do with it. Ok, but why should they? Democracy is about the people, not the states. If a state wants more clout, they'll have to figure out a way to attract more people. That's pretty simple...There is no better metric of fairness in a democratic society than one person, one vote. Surely, even conservatives can see that.
Ok, that's over with...the election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was extremely telling on many fronts but the one I want to key into here is the electoral college and the role it's playing in US politics. I very well can see why the electoral college was established. It was an enticement for less populated territories to join the federation. It was a promise to them that they would have influence in federal matters. It was probably a pretty good system when voting rights were limited and technology had not yet evolved to allow all of the people's votes to be counted.
My contention is that, in recent history, the electoral college system has diverged from being consistent with the actual popular vote (all of those illegal immigrant votes cast aside) which used to be a very rare event. As Stephen King's character Roland in the Dark Tower Series was fond of saying, "The world has moved on." While I think this statement rings true for nearly all of our constitution, it's especially the case for the electoral college. You have to ask yourself whether it's really needed? If you can count every single ballot cast, why the convoluted machinations of the electoral college? I would think conservatives would resonate with it's elimination on the grounds that it reduces bureaucracy and complexity- they seem to like simple- and eliminating this step would certainly simplify things.
The argument that is made against eliminating it is usually that the less populated states would then not have as much influence as they do with it. Ok, but why should they? Democracy is about the people, not the states. If a state wants more clout, they'll have to figure out a way to attract more people. That's pretty simple...There is no better metric of fairness in a democratic society than one person, one vote. Surely, even conservatives can see that.
posted by Politico at 10:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home