There has been a lot of simpering about the electoral college since 2000. A large number of people in our country apparently missed out on high school civics, and have failed to read the constitution. It pisses me off that, in spite of this simpering, in spite of the bumper stickers that say “not my president” and “don’t elect him in 2004 either,” there has been (to my knowledge) not one serious effort to change the electoral college system in the most recent four years.
It’s not all that hard. We strike those lines in the constitution describing the college, and replace them with “the president and vice president are elected as a single ticket, through a majority vote of the entire nation of eligible voters.” This would have a far better chance of passing than the gay marriage red herring.
I, for one, like the electoral college.
(1) It serves to contain and localize errors. When Florida began their recount fiasco, all the other states did not also need to jump in and recount, in the hopes that they might be able to scrounge up a few dozen more votes.
(2) It allows voting to be managed at a state, rather than a federal level. There is exactly one office and one election every four years that requires a reconciliation at the national level. To support this, we could either come up with a single, national voting system and allow the states, counties, and cities to use it the rest of the time, or else responsibility could be localized to the states. If we choose to let the states take care of the mechanics of voting, we need a mechanism to select the president. What if we did something like “each state gets votes equal to its total representation in the house and the senate. States decide how to allocate those votes on their own.”
(3) It emphasizes the fact that the US is not one large, homogenous nation. We need to err on the side of diversity, personal freedom, and personal responsibility.
(4) In those rare cases where in which a weighted majority of the *states* support one candidate, but a majority of the *people* support another, I want the candidate who is acceptable to more of the states in office. That candidate will have a broader, national appeal. He will also be better able to work with congress.
(5) It amplifies the power of my vote. I live in Rhode Island. My vote counts more than yours. Nyah nyah.
While we’re at it, let’s pass these amendments as well:
———————————————
* Strike the second amendment. Replace it with “Congress, nor the states, shall make no law abridging the right of a citizen to peaceably arm themselves and to carry personal firearms and other small weapons.” Up or down, let’s find out if it passes.
* “A citizen shall take unto themselves all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship at the time of their choosing, after they have achieved 12 years of age. This will be accomplished by swearing an oath of loyalty to the United States and by passing an examination proving comprehension and acceptance of the duties, obligations, and rights of an adult citizen.” Yes, this would supersede our current stupid mish-mash of rules pertaining to eligibility for the draft, eligibility for a drivers license, the purchase of tobacco, alcohol and firearms, being tried as an adult rather than a juvenile, ownership of property, ability to marry, leave ones parents, etc.
Leave a Reply