Replies

Interesting essay, as always, sir. Permit be to object on two grounds. Legal, and pragmatic. A national primary would start us down the slippery slope to eliminate the elctoral college. More and more focus would be paid to TOTAL vote, not the states won..besides, NH will never go along. Thye'd just move the 2008 primary to the third week on Jan 2005...

Tactically, the problems with the primary system in its presetn form are due for the most part to the Democratic party's schizophrenic nature...The hard left in the party controls the primaries. A natinal primary would have given us Dean as a nominee..a scary thought indeed..You need a sequence of primaries to allow different candidates to ebb/flow, and see how they can handle the political process..a vetting if you will...Look at Iowa and NH for whom they eliminated..The Dem party should have changed the rules, and kicked the candidates out of the debates, those with less that 10% of the vote...Again..Iowa eliminated Dean..

There is no "slippery slope" to eliminate the Electoral College. The states which have 3, 4, or 5 Electoral College votes have a doubling of their votes. They have 1, 2, or 3 votes based on population. The other 2 votes per state are the "bonus" for their Senators.

Count up those small states. They are more than enough to block an amendment to abolish the College from passing the Senate. And even if it passed the Senate somehow, those states could kill the amendment in the ratification process.

People tend to get nervous when Hillary! proposes a major and disastrous change in American government or society. Socialized Health Care got killed because it was stupid. Abolishing the Electoral College is constitutionally impossible. Just do the math.

John / Billybob