kalipsocs wrote:Why? How is it a fair election that a few select people decide the next president than the total count of votes for the entire country? Not to mention no one is riding on horseback as fast as they can to get the vote in! Times change and its hardly fair that Pennsylvania, Ohio, and a couple other states get to choose the next president.
Well, you'll have to amend the Constitution to get rid of it, as the electoral college (as it is called now
) was established under the authority of Article II, Section I, and Amendment 12. In order to pass a new amendment abolishing the electoral college, you would have to have it ratified by 3/4 of the 50 states - which will never
happen because, for many of those states, it would not be in their interests to do so, and they darn will know it.
According to USConstitution.net
The Framers were wary of giving the people the power to directly elect the President — some felt the citizenry too beholden to local interests, too easily duped by promises or shenanigans, or simply because a national election, in the time of oil lamps and quill pens, was just impractical. Some proposals gave the power to the Congress, but this did not sit well with those who wanted to see true separation of the branches of the new government. Still others felt the state legislatures should decide, but this was thought to make the President too beholden to state interests. The Electoral College, proposed by James Wilson, was the compromise that the Constitutional Convention reached.
The phrase "too beholden to local interests" would be played out by such things as the local interests of large cities of the eastern and western seaboards, the great lakes region, and the Mississippi river valley completely overwhelming the local interests of Wyoming cattle ranchers and Kansas wheat farmers. The fact that an enormous chunk of the population live in the nation's largest cities still
tends to have that effect, but it is somewhat mitigated by the electoral college.
Since the nation was founded on the premise that we are a federation
states, the interests of the several states have to be looked after in the selection of a nationally elected office. Amending the Constitution will remove that filter, effectively disenfranchising anybody who lives in a predominantly rural state. Abolishing the electoral college sounds
like a good idea until you unpack it. Then it doesn't stand up so well.
My dream is to have lived my life so well that future generations of leftists will demand my name be removed from buildings. BTW, have you noticed that the topographical contours of local lake bottoms seem to have changed and become more rich in aluminum alloys and polymers in the last 10 years?