I thought that the 'intent' of the electoral college was to allow STATES RIGHTS to be considered.  By having electoral votes proportionate to the population in the state and the same as the number of senators plus the number of respresentatives allowed for representation of that population, every state has a voice. 
 
While the states with greater population have a greater voice in the process, the smaller states can't be totally ignored because collectively they can out vote a larger state.  This is the part I agree with.
 
Again, the process or the system, is probably  where the problems are.  Edward Demming has been noted to say that when there are problems, don't look at the individuals involved, look at the system for ways to improve the process.  In examining the system,  It is perhaps how the persons in the electoral college are chosen that needs to be examined.  Also how the ballots are chosen, how the election judges are trained etc etc.
 
  I guess that my point is that the electoral college is constitutional and has worked for a long time.  The concept to see it as a compromise between the two factions at the time of the writing is sound.  It is in how we are carrying out that edict, that the problems develop and perhaps where change can improve the process. 
 
Joliene Olson
507-454-1236
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to