The Few Decide For The Many (Huge BusinessWeek report calling for abolition of Electoral College)

BusinessWeek ^ | June 14, 2004

[Dont Mention the War]

Demography, as the saying goes, may be destiny. But an archaic system of representation that includes a winner-take-all selection of electors and eschews proportionate representation at the local level is denying a voice to political minorities. Are you perchance one of the 2.4 million hardy Democrats living in Texas? You might as well hang up your political spurs. Since the Reagan era, Texas has become solidly Republican. Or perhaps you're a GOPer in New York or California, home to a combined 8.5 million members of the Grand Old Party. Tough luck, pal.

---

Many of the distortions can be traced to the Electoral College, set up by the Founding Fathers partly to shield against unfiltered democracy -- then equated with mob rule. The College was also designed to preserve the power of small states by giving them a higher percentage of electoral votes than their populations would warrant. Finally, the College was a sop to Southerners, who were given credit for each slave at the rate of three-fifths of a free voter, magnifying the power of white property owners in Dixie. "These compromises were the basis of the Electoral College," says George Mason University Professor James P. Pfiffner. "But they are not relevant any more."

Today, the Electoral College still benefits smaller states by giving each of them two bonus votes in the Presidential balloting. Because most of these states are becoming increasingly Republican, that hands the GOP a built-in edge of 10 to 12 electoral votes -- more than the margin of victory in 2000.

---

There is a way to avoid such destabilizing contests: The candidate with the most votes wins -- no ifs, ands, or buts. Experts such as Pfiffner would like to see a national dialogue over a direct-election system. Such a debate would, of course, be intensely controversial since it entails a deviation from the Founders' design. But so did abolishing slavery and granting women suffrage. After 216 years of Presidential elections, it seems as if the time is right to reaffirm a basic tenet of democracy -- the one that says everybody's vote counts.

[jimbo123]

Stephen B. Shepard
Editor-in-Chief
Business Week
McGraw-Hill Building · 1221 Avenue of the Americas · 39th Floor · New York, NY 10020
212-512-3896 212-512-4464
Sshepard@aol.com

[F.J. Mitchell]

So what the author is saying is, that as long as the Electorial College worked in favor of electing DemonRATS, it was a-okay, but now that it seems to favor Republicans-it has outlived it's usefullness. Well that's just too damn bad, isn't it?

[Ramius]

The World Series is decided by who wins the most games, not who gets the most runs in the whole series.

[Destro]

What about maintaining the electoral college but making it a points system thus eliminating the kooks who may vote as a protest vote and to be honest I don't much trust those appointed to the college - party hacks and cronies mostly and make the college proportional and not winner take all (or only making it winner take all if the winner gets over 50%)?

With that said the Electoral system (if not a college of people) must stand.

[Lancey Howard]

Business Week is in the same liberal dumpster as Time and Newsweak, et al. It's a fading print publication that struggles by with cheap college-newspaper hires and has-been hacks. No surprise that it's an anti-capitalism, anti-America publication. Democrats run the place.
Business Week will endorse Kerry.

[StAnDeliver]

White: "Kent, I want you to whip up some frenzy over the Electoral College. Nobody's buying the magazine and we need chaos! Chaos sells! You hear me Kent?"

Kent: "But sir, everybody knows the Electoral College works..."

White: "I DON'T CARE Kent! Use a strawman! Play on people's fears! Bring up Florida! Now you make the EC look like yesterday's dishes or you're fired!"

[Torie]

I just endorsed that - three times. I asked the extra two to be deleted, but the mods are on holiday or something. Maybe it is time for flame war. I know you and I are up to it. :)

[Quick1]

They also didn't trust regular white landowners to make the "right" decisions, which is why they allow the electoral voters to switch if the "wrong" candidate is voted for. However, that is quite the rare occurence.

[SoCal Pubbie]

"Finally, the College was a sop to Southerners, who were given credit for each slave at the rate of three-fifths of a free voter, magnifying the power of white property owners in Dixie."

Setting aside all else, isn't this factually in error? Wasn't in fact the 3/5 rule a method to REDUCE the representation by not counting slaves the same as freemen?

[corvus]

Ditto that. The Constitution was conceived to protect us all. Brilliantly so. Checks and balances assure oversight of the executive and constraint on tyranny of legislative majority. The electoral college is an indispensable part of the system. The Founders were well aware of the weakest link in any system of governance, man.

[southernnorthcarolina]

We seem to agree on a lot.

Perhaps. But thrice in six seconds?

[playball0]

Very elegant analogy.

[Torie]

It was a compromise. The North wanted zero, and the South wanted one. Three fifths was the compromise.

[Chu Gary]

As I recall, one of the first things the Hildebeast did upon taking the junior NY seat in the Senate was to draft a bill to abolish the Electoral College - wonder why? The bill was defeated, thank God.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Exactly. The way the article is written is at least not the whole story.

[Freedom4US]

WRONG!

First of all, "unfiltered democracy" is still just as dangerous today, as it was then. Perhaps moreso. Probably moreso.

As I understand it, the 3/5ths deal was a NORTHERN compromise, - the Southern slaveholders understandably wanted each slave to count - reason being for increased representation in congress, not that slaves were to be afforded any rights other than to be a slave. The Northern states, for their part, didn't want any slaves counted at all, in order to dilute the power of the Southern states. We can deduce this stuff, despite what anyone at George Mason Uni might have to say, or Business Week.

Remember, those determined to undermine the constitution won't ever stop, it requires eternal vigilance on the part of the citizenry, to become and remain informed of just what exactly our forefathers did, and bequeathed not to just this country, but the world. What's next, abolishing the Senate, too?

[Torie]

Well I can type three letters in 6 seconds, can't you? And therefore I can click the mouse three times, when I don't get near instant gratification of the post registering.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

The Electoral College must stand. The reason the Founding Fathers wanted it is still the same reason we need it today. Just take a look at California and see where the dems live and then see where the republicans live. This is fair representation

Amen. We can't allow the Electoral College to fall. If the globalist/Libs get their way, only NY and California need vote. We can't allow them to replace our Republic with mob rule.

[xzins]

A small or medium state (20 or fewer electoral votes) would be nuts to change the electoral system to a popular vote.

It'd take about 2 election cycles for the people of Calif, NY, TX, Fla, and PA to realize they could run the country and ignore everyone else.

[Freedom4US]

"Anarchists like chaos"

Maybe, but that can't be their sole motivation. Socialism leads to fascism each and every time. Perhaps they are the same thing, in any case, to be avoided if at all possible. How many times does the world need to re-invent the wheel? The last century's slaughter-fest ought to be proof enough. Right???