I'd like to express a contrary opinion about the electoral college. You posted:
. . . the Electoral College is part of a broader constitutional system to ensure that a gullible plurality of the electorate — especially a majority centered in a few urban areas (such as the megapolitan clusters of counties carried by Gore) — won't necessarily be able to take the country down the rights-constricting, government-expanding path of Canada.
I don't think the electoral college provides any really important benefits. First of all, I question whether the U.S. is actually much less socialistic than Canada. The one and about the only big difference I know about is the absence of universal government funded health care as in Canada. Even here, consider that through Medicare, Medicaid, and health care for federal employees, the military, and veterans, the U.S. government probably funds around half of health care costs already - possibly more than 50%. Is the electoral college responsible for the U.S. having only 50% federally funded health care vs. 100% as in Canada? Has there ever been a universal health care bill passed by Congress and vetoed by a President? I don't think so.
Apologists for the electoral college also like to claim that the system provides benefits for small states. I don't see how. Do Presidential candidates actually spend much time campaigning in small population states like Wyoming or Idaho or Vermont. Of course not. The small population states have few electoral votes and most of them are locks for one party or the other. So it would be a waste of time for either candidate to pay much attention to them. Presidential candidates do, in fact, focus on the big population states - precisely because they have big blocks of electoral votes which are in play. Doing away with the electoral college or at least the winner-take-all feature would actually lessen the Presidential focus on the big population states.
Personally, I would favor abandoning the electoral college system. Of course, I recognize it would be very hard to accomplish this and is not likely to happen. At any point of time, either 1) it hasn't really made a difference and no one cares about it or 2) it has allowed one party to without a popular vote majority and thus it is favored by that party. Right now, a lot of Republicans love the electoral college because Bush lost the popular vote but won anyway. Of couse, a Democratic candidate could win office without winning the popular vote just as easily as a Republican can. And sooner or later, one will. Then the Democrats will be praising the electoral college system while the Republicans will be unhappy with it. |
