Riley von Borstel
For as long as I’ve studied United States politics, I’ve had a definitive opinion regarding the Electoral College, and it’s that I don’t think that it is a positive thing for America. I read both the pros and cons laid out by Loomis and Shafer and my longtime opinion still stands–the Electoral College needs to go. I feel this way for several reasons, but the most prominent of my reasons is that as Loomis says, the Electoral College simply is not fair. It is based on old justifications from the country’s founders, all of whom lived in a time when illiteracy was a commonality and they simply did not trust the average American citizen to make educated political decisions. The fact is that this rationale is outdated and so is the Electoral College.
Something that really stuck out to me from Loomis’ argument was his statement about his vote in Kansas being worthless due to the fact that all of Kansas’ electoral votes have gone to the Republican candidate every election for the past 40 years. On the other hand, if he lived in a swing state, his vote would count and he could actively participate in a competitive election. Also, the Electoral College is notoriously hard for people to understand even though several articles are released about it every election cycle and many citizens question its legitimacy. Because of this system, not every vote carries the same amount of weight. In other words, this system is biased. The vote of a person in a swing state, such as Nebraska, could determine the next U.S. President, whereas the vote of someone in Texas could mean absolutely nothing. Due to this being the case, this is why a candidate that loses by millions of votes in the popular vote can still become the next president.
Riley,
I disagree that the EC is not needed any longer. If not for the EC one county in California would have determined the election in 2016. I am not speaking in favor of any candidate or party but rather in the fairness of representation. If there was no EC then candidates would only campaign in these high population centers. Issues raised in the campaigned would be focused only on the issues important to highly populated regions. It would exclude the needs and feelings of many rural voters and give power only to highly populated states. The founders sought to ensure equal power among all states despite the size and population. This was designed to avoid the tyranny of the majority upon the minority and I believe that the EC still fulfills this role.
Thanks,
Tim F
Tim,
Thanks for your comments. Once again, you have given me a lot to think about. You bring up a great point regarding the representation of rural communities, but in reality, these communities are still left in the dust even though we have the electoral college. Since this is the case, then it is apparent that the electoral college is not going to solve this issue. Personally, I do not think that merely changing the way an election is held will make it so more attention is afforded to rural areas of the United States. What do you think could make this change happen?