Posted on 03/26/2007 11:46:36 AM PDT by 7thson
Below is a letter I will send to my local news rag, The Calvert Independent. Last week, Md. State Sen. Roy Dyson, wrote an letter stating that the Electoral College was confusing and needs changing - his solution by legislative measures. Below is my response. I know that without the Senator's original letter, it may be hard to place mine in context. I am not providing it because the newspaper is not online. How archaic is that?! Anyway, I appreciate any comments to make it better - besides it being too long because they print letters of this size. Most of what I wrote is off the top of my head with minimal research.
At the conclusion of Sen. Dyson’s letter printed in the March 21 edition of The Calvert Independent, I was glad to see him solicit responses. His letter made me disgusted and dismayed that a prominent politician publicly displays such woeful ignorance of the Electoral College.
Sen. Dyson remarked that the EC confuses the majority of citizens. However, instead of educating voters as why the Founding Father’s installed the EC, he two-steps away the issue. First, what is the Electoral College?
As defined at http://www.answers.com/topic/electoral-college, the Electoral College is a “Constitutionally mandated process for electing the U.S. president and vice president. Each state appoints as many electors as it has senators and representatives in Congress (U.S. senators, representatives, and government officers are ineligible); the District of Columbia has three votes. A winner-take-all rule operates in every state except Maine and Nebraska.” In essence, if a Presidential candidate wins the voting majority of a state, that candidate wins the electoral votes. An easy enough definition anyone can find in any encyclopedia or through the internet. What Sen. Dyson failed to explain is the Electoral College’s purpose.
The purpose is that the Electoral College dilutes the votes of population centers that may have a different view from the rest of the country. This forces a candidate to campaign in many states and locales, rather than concentrating in major cities. Without an Electoral College, candidates would only have to campaign in large populated metropolitan areas – such as Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, etc. – and ignore rural areas. Would southern states want national policy dictated by the wants and desires of Mid Atlantic and New England states? Would western states want national policy dictated by those who live in Los Angeles, San Francisco, or Seattle? What is ironic is that the Northern states implemented the EC system because they feared the large populations, at the time of the writing and debate of our Constitution, of Southern states.
Sen. Dyson also lamented that neither 2004 Presidential candidate campaigned in Maryland. President Bush did not because his people correctly determined it was a waste of resources and Sen. John Kerry did not because he knew he had the state locked up.
Now, Sen. Dyson, instead of explaining how the Electoral College provides protection for the entire nation, complains it is an archaic system. He is either vastly ignorant of the EC or he knows the role of the EC and purposely misleads and confuses citizens. Both explanations deem him unfit for public service and citizens should vote him out at the next opportunity.
In fact, Sen. Dyson is a typical leftist. Instead of defending the Constitution, instead of defending our laws and electoral procedures, instead of promoting and advancing the cause of liberty, he seeks to undermine our liberty, our laws, and our Constitution. He claims the EC is confusing and archaic and for the ignorant, it is. However, he should know the purpose of the Electoral College. I suppose I paid more attention to United States History and civics than did the good Senator. Why do I make such a statement? Because I know what he proposes is unconstitutional. He wants to change the EC by Congressional legislation; however, it requires a Constitutional Amendment to enact such a change. Again, he is either ignorant of this or is willfully deceiving the citizens. Either explanation makes him unfit for office.
I conclude this letter in a compromising tone by agreeing with Sen. Dyson – the Electoral College needs changing and I offer this solution. In the 2006 election, Lt. Gov. Michael Steele lost the Senate race to Rep. Ben Cardin by losing the counties of Charles, Baltimore, Prince Georges, Howard, and Montgomery, as well as Baltimore City. In essence, five counties and one city control the future and citizens of Maryland. Looking at other Democrat states, the same pattern emerges. One or two cities, with a handful of counties, control state politics.
My solution is not to dismantle the EC system but to expand the system within the state. Each county should receive one electoral vote. Whoever wins the county popular vote, wins that electoral vote. After tallying each county electoral vote, whoever has the most county electoral votes, wins the state. For Presidential races, whoever wins the most county electoral votes wins the state and that states Federal Electoral votes. This will ensure Senate and Presidential candidates campaign in and throughout each state.
Imagine how different the political landscape would be if this system was in place during the 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections. A simple search as to who won the majority of state counties would give us a completely different Congress than what we have today.
Bump to Top I
We had something similar to what you propose in Georgia many, many years ago - the "County Unit System". That got tossed to accomodate the growing power of Atlanta.
I don't recall if it was repealed or invalidated by one of our black-robed overlords. That happened way before my time.
Of course, I know a system like this would never fly. The leftists know they would lose. Their power is concentrated in large metro areas. Not metrosexual but it Seattles case it may be. 8-)
Wouldn't survive a court challenge because it violates "One man one vote" (although the federal electoral college does as well, since each Senator gets one vote too), make it one for each state legislative district, of either house, or both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.