01-06-2008, 06:44 PM
It is true that getting rid of the electoral college would mean that one man gets one vote, but there would be other consequences as well.
In the 2000 election, Florida was not the only state where the vote was close. In New Mexico, Al Gore received 366 more votes than George Bush (source at link below), but there was no legal struggle over those delegates because they didn't matter. What if they did? If every vote is critical in a close election we could have a political catastrophe that threatens our poliical stability.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm
If we got rid of the electoral college, the entire nature of political campaigns would change as well. Right now, candidates are forced to speak to the middle in the "battleground" states where the vote is expected to be close. This would change if we got rid of the electoral college. In my opinion, this would cause our politics to become even more polarized as the candidates would only be interested in their base.
I would like to see more than two parties too, but what evidence is there to support the assertion that getting rid of the electoral college would do this? I certainly do not want to see us become a parliamentary democracy. This is a system that is all about special interests. Look at Italy; they used to have a "housewife party". Their political objective was to obtain a government pension for all housewives.
Why stop at the Presidency? The real travesty is in how we elect our Senators. A voter in Alaska, Delaware, et al is exercising far more power than a voter in California or Texas when they vote for a Senator.
In the 2000 election, Florida was not the only state where the vote was close. In New Mexico, Al Gore received 366 more votes than George Bush (source at link below), but there was no legal struggle over those delegates because they didn't matter. What if they did? If every vote is critical in a close election we could have a political catastrophe that threatens our poliical stability.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm
If we got rid of the electoral college, the entire nature of political campaigns would change as well. Right now, candidates are forced to speak to the middle in the "battleground" states where the vote is expected to be close. This would change if we got rid of the electoral college. In my opinion, this would cause our politics to become even more polarized as the candidates would only be interested in their base.
I would like to see more than two parties too, but what evidence is there to support the assertion that getting rid of the electoral college would do this? I certainly do not want to see us become a parliamentary democracy. This is a system that is all about special interests. Look at Italy; they used to have a "housewife party". Their political objective was to obtain a government pension for all housewives.
Why stop at the Presidency? The real travesty is in how we elect our Senators. A voter in Alaska, Delaware, et al is exercising far more power than a voter in California or Texas when they vote for a Senator.