Lately, there's been a lot talk about college.
The electoral college, that is. And for good reason. As they cast the votes that really count when electing the President of the United States.
Nothing new about this. It's been in the US Constitution from the get-go. Article II, Section I, Clause 3 to be exact. [reference: Electoral College ]
And below is an elementary lesson on civics on how our government works:
Why the electoral college?
After one of the first Brexits, 240 years ago in 1776, the American colonies had their suspicions of rulers holding absolute power over them. Such as monarchs like King George III.
And rightly so. As historian and moralist, Lord Acton, is credited to offer his opinion:
absolute power
corrupts absolutely.
So the Constitution was designed with checks and balances for our leaders. And that included a check for the chief executive. That is evident as the founders did not trust a popular vote to elect the president.
For 230 years, there has been many debates on this system as it has its flaws as seen below:
What's the solution?
A popular vote seems to remedy the downside of the electoral college. But the system does have an upside in protecting the interests of the country as a whole.
Consider a popular vote for president.
The candidates would concentrate only on the big cities. New York City. Los Angeles. Denver. Seattle. Atlanta. Houston, Chicago. ... Those populations will largely will determine the elections.
Screw fly-over country. And the needs and concerns of the more rural areas will be overlooked for the denizens of big cities. And those differences can be poles apart.
Consider the electoral college.
As it is, fly-over country has more weight than the more populated states. Such as pointed out in Adam Ruins Everything, an electoral vote per capita in Wyoming is worth three times more than an electoral vote in California.
Having lived in California, I understand the feeling that my vote didn't count much. At least for president. We were totally written off as in the tank for the Democrats. And seen a waste of time and money to court our votes. Except candidates saw California as their cash cow and stopped by regularly to milk the billionaire donors for their campaigns...in swing states.
Currently, I reside in Wyoming. More muscle for my vote, right? But we're mostly written off as in the tank for the Republicans. And we are ignored anyway. Only 3 electoral votes at stake. Who cares about us?
Time for a change?
That would require amending the Constitution. It's been done before. Some 27 times (the first 10 being the Bill of Rights). But the process is not easy to do. [reference: The Constitutional Amendment Process]
But that's the way it is. Under this Constitution. And it's worked remarkably well since 1787.
So begins another thread.
Civics.
And this election cycle, vote your conscious. For there is more at stake than the electors we elect at the Electoral College.
-------------------------
-------------------------
Similar posts on this topic:
ZAMM (part 7) - Yes or No - Gotcha! (2012)
PC Watch (part 2) - The South Park Offense (2013)
Timeless Truths (part 6) - Magna Carta - 800 years and still going strong (2015)
-------------------------
-------------------------
That backfired. For example, many presidents later like Abraham Lincoln, that rough country lawyer from that upstart party, were very proud to have been born in a log cabin rather than on a plantation.
According to trends and reliable predictions, the population is, and has been, moving from the countryside to the cities. Small states like Rhode Island and Delaware, still have equal electoral power with large states like Alaska and Texas. The cities are where the problems are and cities rely on the countryside for everything for their infrastructure. In the future, the countryside will contain these elements: wilderness, both private and public; a very small group of very rich, gentlemen ranchers and farmers; a very small group of individuals who eke it out in the countryside living a primitive lifestyle not requiring much governmental action; and a very large area controlled by corporations for feeding the infrastructure of the city.
Almost all of the necessary government action will be needed toward the needs of the city. In fact, they will be and are becoming city states with more importance than the states they occupy.
So, I believe there is a need to remove the Electoral College and allow the people (with proper due diligence to avoid any kind of voter fraud) to vote in all elections, local and national, via the Internet (at libraries and post offices for those that do not have access to the Internet any other way) by popular vote.
And, to reduce the tremendous amount of money required for most campaigns, require only petitions for candidates to qualify and take the power away from the two major parties in manipulating elections by money by providing government paid television and Internet advertising for all qualified candidates--equally.
If this requires a constitutional amendment, so be it. We do have the right, "to alter or abolish it."
Ron