10-24-2011, 09:51 PM
The anti-majoritarian provisions of the constitution were useful compromises in the eighteenth century, but they are starting to interfere with good government.
I think davester is right in thinking that it's simpler at this point to render the effect of the electoral college nugatory than it is to try to amend it, simply because we've mythologized the founders so much that it's difficult to get around key provisions.
But the electoral college has been a problem for a long time: the twelfth amendment is a direct response to a flawed electoral system. It could hardly be argued that the candidates who won an electoral majority but lost the popular vote represent an array of very great political talent. And the electoral college means that elections are determined by Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Michigan, while New York, Texas, and California can be safely ignored.
It's an embarrassment.
I think davester is right in thinking that it's simpler at this point to render the effect of the electoral college nugatory than it is to try to amend it, simply because we've mythologized the founders so much that it's difficult to get around key provisions.
But the electoral college has been a problem for a long time: the twelfth amendment is a direct response to a flawed electoral system. It could hardly be argued that the candidates who won an electoral majority but lost the popular vote represent an array of very great political talent. And the electoral college means that elections are determined by Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Michigan, while New York, Texas, and California can be safely ignored.
It's an embarrassment.