Electoral College

I think of a good system to keep the big states from making the smaller states irrelevant in a presidential election.

 

I think the Founding Fathers had it right...the ones who want to do away with the EC are generally those who disagree with recent elections.

 

One of the things I like about the EC is that it takes the factor of voter turn out away from the results. State by state voter turn out which could be effected by weather or other things is not a factor.

 

The EC is an established compromise between some of the original Constitutional Convention who advocated that the Executive Office should be elected by the Senate and a group that suggested a straight up 1 person, 1 vote election for President. The delegates of the original CC were very suspicious of total democracy and wanted each state to have a say as to who would be the Chief Executive.

 

Keep College - Electors should be selected by congressional district - with the two extra electoral votes going to the winner of the statewide popular vote.

 

That sounds like a winner to me!

 

That seems a reasonable proposal.

 

What about proportional EC votes to match the state popular vote?

 

<Going out on a limb>

I dislike the EC for the same reason that I dislike the philosophical justification for affirmative action. I don't see it as a proper function of the govt. to determine the worth of an individual's contribution to society be that as opinion, labor, or anything else. If I move to WY the real value of my vote would increase, decrease if I moved to NY, and stay the same peradventure I do. Regardless of the fact that neither my IQ, biases, grasp of the issues, or even public concern would fluctuate the value of my vote certainly would. Similarly, if I underwent gender reassignment I'm sure I'd "qualify" for more jobs (and perhaps higher salary) than I do now-- but through no fault of my own!!! Also:

</limb>

 

I think we should keep the electoral college as is.

 

Our Founding Fathers got this right. Leave it as is.

 

Without the EC, New York, California, Texas, Florida, and Ill. would elect the president and control the nation. None of the rest of the states would matter in any national election.

 

There is room to change within the Constitutional framework of the electoral college. The idea of giving all EC votes to a candidate with a popular plurality is only practiced by 48 states.

Each state has the right to decide how these votes are distributed. I think a reflection of the popular vote as close as you can get it is much better than winner take all.

 

This is my view,too. The FF had a good idea, but now that candidates can freely travel to all states and all voters can have access to candidates via tv, internet, media, then there should be more voter count. However, a popular election of president is just not workable. The candidates would ignore smaller states altogether.

The only other plan I'd advocate is a tier-ed state system of the EC. That is, have 4 levels - Each level gets X number of ec votes. California, NY, Ill, Fla, could be in the top tier. Each of them gets the same number of EC votes. Next tier would get slightly less. So on and so on. You would have the larger states get more EC votes, but no larger state would be worth more than another. That would make more states competitive and make the parties less likely to write off certain states.

 

Like it or not, It is here to stay.

 

That sounds like one of the voting plans for the European Parliament

 

We have a good republic; the system works well as is. Let's end abortion or do something important.