When this nation was in its infancy and communications from city to city took days, months to outlying states, there was purpose to the Electoral College. In order to expedite government, vote tallying was done using Electors, or representatives from one of the parties supposedly representing his constituency. They would carry their region's votes to Washington so that the tally was prompt.
But the day of the Pony Express is long gone and the bulk of 1st Class Mail is no long rail-carried. It's time for an adjustment to this vestigial appendage to our Constitution. In concept, popular vote should be the same as the electoral vote. Currently, they are nothing alike.
Solve the mystery of security and Internet voting for local, state and federal elections, even absentee voting, is an irresistible positive force of true popular vote. This would ultimately end the two-party system. Then again, it may create the 77-party system. Hmmmmmmm.
David D. Fihn
* * *
The reason Mr. Fihn listed for the Electoral College being out dated has nothing to do with why it was implemented and why it is still very necessary. New York City and California have very different ideas on how things should be run than in places as the media call it "fly over country", like here in Tennessee. If the electoral college were eliminated then it would never ever matter if anyone in "fly over country" voted again, but then that is the goal. Those who want power over the little people have bought the votes in the big states with massive give-a-ways of working peoples money and by convincing people that the only freedom they need is the freedom from responsibility. There needs to be a way for those who love actual freedom to have their voices heard instead of being shouted down by the moochers and looters. With every right that is lost we take one more step toward slavery. Please remember the smallest minority is the individual. The individual's inalienable rights must always be protected and the Electoral College is one way to try to protect those rights.
* * *
It just kills me when I hear people give all these silly reasons why we still need the electoral college. What I find so funny is that they are reasons that have nothing at all to do with why our founding fathers put it into place. If you do your research you will find that:
1. the founding fathers used the electoral college to pick the president instead of by popular vote because they simply did not trust the public at large and
2. the way that we elect the president is in no way what the founding fathers intended.
The political parties have completely hijacked what our founding fathers intended (which was electors who were not already decided on who they were voting for). So I hate to break it to those of you who think we still need the electoral college, but Mr. Fihn, you are correct sir. It's a horrible system which needs to be done away with.
* * *
The Electoral College was one of the bargains struck during the founding of our country. It balances the votes of individuals represented by the House and the power of the separate states represented by the Senate.
If the Electoral College is now considered obsolete then the Senate is obsolete. If all we have left is the House then the densly populated urban areas could totally control the legislative process to the detriment of the less populated states. Except for a handful of notable blips along the way it is a balance that seems to have worked well so far.
* * *
In their amazing wisdom, our Founders deliberately created a Republic and not a Democracy. They understood that an unchecked mob could be as tyrannical as any monarch. We have 50 states but a small majority of citizens live in only nine. Should the Electoral College be dispensed with, common sense would dictate that presidential candidates and their parties would focus their attention (and our money) on the most populated states while ignoring the least populated. It’s not hard to imagine that their economic policies would advantage the nine most populated states at the expense of the remaining 41.
* * *
C.L. Miller wrote: "If all we have left is the House then the densely populated urban areas could totally control the legislative process to the detriment of the less populated states."
Given that urban areas are predominately blue, and rural areas self-reliantly red, you can see where certain type folks would want to end the Electoral College.
* * *
Rural areas self-reliantly red? Really? So that's the difference? Now I understand. Never mind farm subsidies, milk subsidies, ethanol subsidies, and agricultural subsidies in general. Oh, and "certain folks?" I can speak code words, too, so I know what you mean there, too. Thanks for the insights.