10-24-2011, 09:54 PM
rjmacs wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
No. Unless someone wants to argue that the Constitution was perfect at the beginning, then there comes a time when what made sense then doesn't make sense any more.
We don't change the Constitution simply because we've figured out a better way to do things. We change the Constitution to remedy serious flaws, to guarantee specific rights, occasionally to change the powers of government.
So, what is the fundamental failure of the Electoral College you wish to remedy? Personally i don't find the case of the 2000 election, by itself, to be a compelling argument for Constitutional amendment. As best i can tell, the Electoral College has generally reflected the will of the people in presidential contests. Is there a serious error, injustice, or denial of fundamental rights that demands correction? If not, why should we spend the enormous amount of time and attention it would take to amend the Constitution, rather than working on improving other parts of our electoral system?
The Electoral College has already been changed by amendment - the 12th Amendment. That happened in 1804. Was the "flaw" they fixed more serious than electing a person president who didn't get the most votes? If so, why do you think so?