Follow the Leader
If recent history is any judge, young people will be aggressively urged by parents, teachers, politicians, and celebrities to vote in 2008. Your government professor will try to make it seem relevant. Puff Daddy (is it P-Diddy now) will try to make it seem cool. However, if you live in Illinois, you will be faced with the same existential question that most Americans ponder every fourth November: Thanks to the Electoral College, does my vote matter?
Because of the winner-take-all feature of each states electoral votes, the only votes that are actively contested are those in battle-ground states. Obama, Clinton, and Rudy will spend months in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, the only time they’ll be in Chicago is to fundraise.
Do you feel disempowered yet? Is it any surprise that our voter turnout hovers around fifty percent for Presidential elections?
Before you defect to Canada, check out Maryland’s solution.
According to the New Yorker, Governor Martin O’Mally is close to signing a bill that would make Maryland the first to pledge itself to the National Popular Vote plan. This interstate compact would restrict the Electoral College to a ceremonial role, much like the Queen of England. The idea is that once enough states have signed on to put together a majority of electoral votes (271), those state agree that their electors will ALWAYS vote for the winner of the popular vote in all fifty states and Washington D.C.
If other states adopted this plan, it could alter our entire political system without amending the constitution (remember: 3/4s of states much agree to amend. The battleground states would form a coalition). If every state was worth contesting, Presidential elections would be truly national. Grassroots politics would blossom everywhere, not just in the swing states.
Cheers to Maryland for reignited the debate on the usefulness of the Electoral College. Will other states play “follow the leader”?
(Are there any brave souls out there that would like to make an argument for the Electoral College?)
posted by CitizenPatriot at 9:54:00 PM
5 Comments:
Well this Bill would indeed force candidates to speak out to more states. It to me is also the only way to force them to speak out to more states. We've learned that even a politician wants to visit all states it is suicide come election time. This can be seen when Nixon lost to Kennedy. Nixon said he would travel to all 50 states. He broke his leg in some nowhere town in i believe Alaska or Maine and ended up losing.
Living in Illinois I think it is practical to dislike the Electoral College even if you are on the left. For those who voted Bush in 2000 the E.C was the reason that he took the office, and for this reason it would be too difficult to ratify the bill. With that said, areas do change, red areas can turn blue and vis versa. So I think that it isn't necessary to get rid of the E.C but I sure wouldn't mind it.
10:45 PM
Quinn,
The basic tenet of any democracy is that the majority rules while still protecting minority rights. If more people vote for someone, THEY SHOULD WIN.
How can you say it's not necessary? I'd say it's CRITICAL
7:20 AM
I think it encumbent upon those with the power to change the electoral college to change the electoral college. This atiquated system was basically set up due to the lack of accessible information sans gossip prior to radio and television. After 1960 the elections became televised thus making information more easily accessible. Now with the internet all voters who care to collect information on current events and the candidates can. There is no uninformed public. Who cares if it's taken up other duties?
The Electoral College handicaps larger state's oppinions by giving smaller states power.
Though those smaller states would be insignificant without the electoral college they 're more people in the larger states that would be affected. Those larger states are more important.
Who cares what Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware Montana, Rhode Island, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Idaho, Nebraska, West VIrginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah,...lets save some time here... over 2/3 of the States have to say anyway?
I mean who really cares about the minority populations?
Not me, lets get rid of the electoral college.
9:34 PM
FOR ONCE JOHN, I AGREE WITH YOU
6:57 AM
I like how Maryland took the initiative as the sole state to come up with this law and possibly approve it. I feel like this would be a sort of compromise because the small states would still have 3 electoral votes, but popular vote would ultimately show the winner of the election. Personally I think a system like this would prove positive for in the future.
9:39 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home