DEFENDING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

My friend, Andre Louis from "Inside Andre's Head" recently posted a two-part video in support of abolishing the Electoral College. Since he already put out that side of the argument, I figured I would play Devil's Advocate and give the other side, in support of keeping the Electoral College. This is an age-old argument here in the States and to be honest, I wouldn't blame you for picking either side. That being said, let me give you my side of the debate and then you can decide for yourself. I would recommend watching Dre's video first since he is the one doing 'prosecution' of the E.C. (left alone, my side would win by default).

The first point I would like to make about the Electoral College is that this is a process created by our Founding Fathers. To me, that puts it in a special category. A lot of what was created by our Founding Fathers in making this country; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights for instance, is what we all identify with being 'The United States of America'. I don't really like "Slippery Slope" arguments, but I do believe that if we start re-writing the Constitution we put it in the hands of people that are (in my opinion) far more corrupt and self-serving than the people who wrote it the first time. I don't know what a Constitution written in our time would look like, but scares me to even consider it. Now, I know that we have a procedure for Amending the Constitution, but we're talking about eliminating an Article of the Constitution, not just adding an idea, and that should not be taken lightly. Changing the principle structure of the voting process can lead to more changes that may rob us of some of the election process in the future. Imagine this argument on the Senate floor; "Why can't we abolish the 1965 Voting Rights Act? We did away with the Electoral College and the Voting Rights Act wasn't even in the original Constitution." It's better, I think, to protect the whole process venomously.

My second defense is that I believe the Electoral College helps protect State's Rights. We are not just "America", we are "The United States of America". The reason is the same as it was when the country was formed, different regions have different cultures and different concerns and needs. The E.C. helps protect the original idea that each state votes for the President who best represents it's own concerns. Keep in mind that it was States Rights issues that principally caused the Civil War. Removing the E.C. would almost certainly leave some states feeling that they have somehow had their say in the election diminished. The popular vote concept ignores the fact that states have always had some degree of sovereignty. There is no way they won't, or even shouldn't, feel their power has been usurped by the Federal Government.

Another problem with popular vote that can't be overlooked is the fact that most of the population of the U.S. rests in it's big cities. While eliminating the E.C. would certainly empower Democrats and Minorities, who have far more representation in large cities, (the reason I believe they support abolishing it) it would come at the cost of removing influence from Western states in particular. The formula now is that Democrats represent the East Coast and the West Coast along with a few other high population areas and the Republicans represent the vast majority of the land mass of the U.S. that has scattered populations (Probably the main reason it was possible for Bush to win the Electoral vote and lose the popular vote). For the Republicans to be forced to compete on Democrat's soil in just a few major cities would certainly change the debate. It's hard to imagine that debate would change in any way favorable to rural people. Look at it this way; If the majority of Hispanic people lived in Utah, why would I care about any of their issues or waste any of my time and money there when my message can be spread better in big venues with huge crowds in large cities instead of small crowds in gymnasiums spread all over Utah? The E.C. makes it possible for inner city people to compete fairly with rural people. Rural states are left feeling that at least their issues were addressed and their vote counted, even if only in winning their state.

The 2000 Presidential Election is the main catalyst for the movement against the E.C.. The feeling among Democrats is that their man, Al Gore, would have won if it would have gone by popular vote alone. I can't blame them for feeling cheated, but the fact is; those were the rules at the time. It's very important to look at this issue objectively and not want to eliminate the E.C. based on bitterness or sour grapes. This would be the single biggest change to our voting structure ever, and I would think long and hard before I made a choice based on emotion rather than what is best for the whole country. H.C.