"As a nation,we have come to embrace "one person, one vote" as a fundamental democratic principle, yet the allocation of electoral votes to the states violates that principle. It is hardly an accident that no other country in the world has imitated our Electoral College. If we were writing or revisiting the constitution now, we would almost certainly adopt a rather simple method of choosing our presidents: a national popular vote, followed by a run-off if no candidate wins a majority. We applaud when we witness such systems operating elsewhere in the world. Perhaps we should try one here." - Alexander Keyssar
Keyssar makes the obvious point that although the US places an emphasis on the importance and significance of the American population's right to vote, the fact is that the electoral college, therefore the state's decisions are what decide the outcome of the presidential elections. He states that we are the only nation that utilizes the electoral college and that no other nation attempts to emulate this system. Another fact he states is that by eliminating the electoral college and solely using the popular vote, it would simplify elections greatly.
The electoral college has always been a contentious and confusing topic. Many Americans probably do not even understand the concept in its entirety. I agree with Keyssar completely and believe that the electoral college undermines the principle of free open elections, because when it comes down to how a candidate will win an election... it lies within winning the electoral college. This topic resonated most with me therefore I chose to discuss it, especially because of the 2000 presidential election in which Al Gore won the popular vote but did not win the electoral college, therefore losing the election to President George. This is one of my earliest political memories and ever since then I developed a resentment toward the electoral college. If this great nation is built upon democracy and freedom then the electoral college is clearly infringing on the people's vote. It is a hypocritical process, which makes any American criticism of other "failing" governments around the world one with no basis. The electoral college has caused the loss of elections for 3 other candidates in the past and it is surely bound to be a problem once again in the future if it is not addressed properly.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes, and thus the presidency, to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by replacing state winner-take-all laws for awarding electoral votes.
ReplyDeleteEvery vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 80% of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.
The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of Electoral College votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). The candidate receiving the most popular votes from all 50 states (and DC) would get all the 270+ electoral votes of the enacting states.
The presidential election system, using the 48 state winner-take-all method or district winner method of awarding electoral votes, that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founders. It is the product of decades of change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founders in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. States can, and have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Historically, major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).
Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls, almost always in the 70-80% range or higher.
in recent or past closely divided battleground states like CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA --75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%;
in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE -74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%;
in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and
in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.
Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.
The bill has passed 33 state legislative chambers in 22 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 250 electoral votes. The bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.
NationalPopularVote
Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc
Great job on all the posts so far. The lack of trust in people that Madison shows in The Federalist, show the reason for the electoral college. It assumes that people are irresponsible and thus should not vote directly for the President. What are your thoughts on this view?
ReplyDelete