Replies

I have read and understand youre arguments. I simply do not agree with them. I hold the opinion--unpopular though it may be among the Freepers--that the Framers not only expected us to change the Constitution, they wanted us to do so. Not on a whim or for a foolish or haphazard reason. Men of science, such as Franklin, knew technology would change the impact of certain portions of the document. So they created a document that could change as needed.

Obvious examples of this are ending slavery and the votes for people other than white land owners. These are positive moves on the part of our government over the years.

To me, the easiest thing to do is put it to a vote. Call for a constitutional convention, address the issue, and see what the general population wants to do. Should it become apparent that the electoral college is deemed unnecessary, then so be it.

I have read Madison's Journal as well as a book (cannot remember the author), "Miracle in Philadelphia." Sherman and others were concerned that the general public would not know enough about the candidates to make an informed decision. Why? Because it often took news weeks and months to travel from one end of the country to the other. Hence we have the Battle of New Orleans bein fought after the end of the War of 1812 because Gen. Andrew Jackson had not heard that the war had ended.

Modern communications methods have eliminated that concern.