Is the Electoral College Obsolete?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply

Electoral College? Busted or Working?

Poll ended at Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:43 am

Ain't broke, don't fix it.
3
60%
Kinda broke, but still working as designed. Don't open the box.
0
No votes
Sure, let's try it. What could POSSIBLY go wrogn?
0
No votes
Scrap it for one man (er, whatever), one vote across the board. Who needs Montana, anyway?
0
No votes
Vote? The majority of the population isn't smart enough. Oligarchy forever!
0
No votes
Present!
2
40%
 
Total votes: 5

JLawson
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Is the Electoral College Obsolete?

Post by JLawson »

The National Popular Vote Corporation seems to think it's time for something better.
Under the U.S. Constitution, the states have exclusive and plenary (complete) power to allocate their electoral votes, and may change their state laws concerning the awarding of their electoral votes at any time. Under the National Popular Vote bill, all of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538).
I can see the point of electing the President by a popular vote - but I don't agree with it. This idea effectively concentrates the power to elect a President to the East and West coasts. Flyover country might as well not exist. And Wyoming? Pfft. There's not enough people to matter, and sheep & cows don't vote.

When you concentrate such influence by population, you can end up with decidedly skewed effects - and severely unanticipated consequences. I could see, from this, a point where a LOT of states end up tired of having no say in Washington and decide to cut themselves off from a political oligarchy which doesn't address their needs. (Hmmm. Arizona and border control come to mind there, where the government won't enforce the laws already on the books.)

Our current system has flaws, to be sure - but I think the benefits of the electoral college outweighs the flaws. It gives every state a stake in the game, instead of just a few, and makes it a bit harder to do the 'one man, one vote, one time' style of elections that seem prevalent in 3rd world governments when you get a charismatic figurehead. I am reluctant to scrap what works for something that seems pretty easy to skew.

This just seems like an unneeded complication, which will not improve the output.
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.

Post Reply