[Winona Online Democracy]
Dean,
You inadvertently make the ideal argument for the electoral college. What
if, in 1960, several voting machines in key republican districts of Illinois
just disappear. Kennedy might have won the election by less than 200,000
votes. Oh, sorry. That did happen.
The electoral college, from what the talking heads on TV are saying (and
they seem to know more about it than I do), was intended to prevent the
presidential election from becoming a popularity contest. (Since you're
reminiscing about high school, think about the king and queen of prom.)
Imagine if a candidate were to target a segment of the population, say the
richest 1%, and tell the other 99% he was going to tax that 1% into
oblivion. Not only that but he was going to redistribute that money to the
99% through a series of government entitlements. That would certainly
garner some votes, perhaps even 48% of the votes. Oh, sorry. That happened
too.
To be serious for a moment, the fact that America is not a pure democracy,
and is in fact a republic, has redeemed us to this point. We have delegated
our voice to a representative that we expect to act in the public good. If
we were to submit to majority rule, we may not have ever attained abolition
in the 19th century, suffrage for blacks, women, and non-property owners in
the 20th century, or civil rights in the 60's. If majority rules, we'd be
governed by polls. If majority rules, partial birth abortion would be
banned, all the public schools would be Christian, and you would never see
civil unions for homosexual couples.
Perhaps the solution is a compromise. Let the congressional district
representatives carry their own votes into the electoral college. The lines
are already drawn, it's how the votes are dolled out to the states now.
Then let the 2 senatorial votes be cast for the majority candidate within
the state, or split based on a tie. It brings us one step closer to the
popular vote and still honors the original intent of the founders.
In any case, we have to be very careful of messing with our constitution.
It is old but enduring, and has served us well. We could write another
constitution every generation or so, but then we'd be no better off than
France. And imagine what kind of constitution might have come out of the
sixties!
gene thiele
winona, mn
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 11:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Winona] RE: Election
> [Winona Online Democracy]
>
> Cherisa;
> This may date me a bit, but i remember walking into my Sophomore (High
> School)
> English class the day after the election in 68 and our teacher who was
from
> Chicago
> telling those of us in the class who were Humphry backers not to worry
> because
> Mayor Daily in Chicago would "Find enough votes" for him in Chicago that
he
> would
> pull it off.
> Alas he was wrong, but other than that i don't remember anything
resembling
> this
> mess.
> Not to get on my soapbox here which may not be the proper form, but i
think
> this
> shows beyond a doubt the need to amend the Constitution to do away with
the
> electoral college.
> Dean.
>
>
>
> ----------------
> This message was posted to the Winona Online Democracy Project.
> Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or
unsubscribe.
> Please sign all messages posted to this list with your actual name.
> Posting of commercial solicitations is not allowed on this list.
> Report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
----------------
This message was posted to the Winona Online Democracy Project.
Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Please sign all messages posted to this list with your actual name.
Posting of commercial solicitations is not allowed on this list.
Report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
