Common Cause - Holding Power ResponsibleCommon Cause - Holding Power Responsible

Topics
Our Issues
Money in Politics
Election Reform
Media and Democracy
Ethics in Government

Government Accountability
International

Press Center
Research Center
Register to Vote

Sign Up and join the Community - click here

Reform the Electoral College -- quickly!

We've worked hard for the past couple years to get rid of the Electoral College in its current form by enacting the National Popular Vote plan in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.  A great opinion piece today in the NY Times makes a strong case for why we need to pass NPV in many states now--in 2009 and 10--and not wait around.

There is no reason to feel sentimental about the Electoral College. One of the main reasons the founders created it was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted -- as three-fifths of a white person -- when Electoral College votes were apportioned.

The founders also were concerned, in the day of the wooden printing press, that voters would not have enough information to choose among presidential candidates.
While these reasons for the Electoral College have lost all relevance, its disadvantages loom ever larger. To start, the system excludes many voters from a meaningful role in presidential elections. If you live in New York or Texas, for example, it is generally a foregone conclusion which party will win your state's electoral votes, so your vote has less meaning -- and it can feel especially meaningless if you vote on the losing side. On the other hand, if you live in Florida or Ohio, where the outcome is less clear, your vote has a greatly magnified importance.
The Electoral College also makes America seem more divided along blue-red lines than it actually is. If you look at an Electoral College map, California appears solidly blue and Alabama solidly red. But if you look at a map of the popular votes, you see a more nuanced picture....

One of the biggest problems with the Electoral College, of course, is that three times since the Civil War -- most recently, with George W. Bush in 2000 -- it has awarded the presidency to the loser of the popular vote. The president should be the candidate who wins the votes of the most Americans.


Tags: national popular vote, election reform, electoral college (all tags)


Display:

Reform the Electoral College -- Not Abolish It

Imagine if a recount involved all 136million votes. A national popular vote would be an incredible mess. Why not instead of mashing all voters together into one unmanageable pile, break it down further like Maine and Nebraska do, two for each state, one for each congressional district, the way they are apportioned? This would help make more areas relevant like it did for Omaha.
And it would prevent another travesty like 2000 when a handful of votes in a state where the governor is the candidate's brother and the secretary of state manages his campaign causes a 54 vote swing and decides the election.

by felkakarp on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:27:14 AM EST


Electoral College

Democratizing the Electoral College Lawsuit

<font color="#ff0000">The 1787 Art.2 Electoral College was reformed in 1868 by Amend. XIV§2!</font>

A Civil Action is now pending before the US District Court to Democratize the Electoral College that will assure that the Electoral College Vote will MAP the popular vote in future presidential elections without need of a constitutional amendment or any state legislative acts by enforcing the MAP (Mal-Apportionment Penalty) Clause of Amend. XIV§2 of the United States Constitution adopted July 28, 1868. {Ref: http://www.electors.us/}

"Defendant's [Cheney] certain bias presentation for tabulation in the Hall of the House of Representatives, January 6, 2009, (Note: Now January 8, 2009) of majority polled presidential electors from unbounded southern states ungrounded in either state or federal law , constitutes a discriminatory abridgment of the voting rights of minority polled presidential electors based on race and/or party affiliation in violation of the mal-apportionment penalty clause pursuant to the United States Constitution (Amend. XIV§2) and statutory Code (2U.S.C.§6)." - Gordon vs Cheney.- November 24th, 2008

 PLAINTIFF'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION DATA EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO PRESENT ORAL ARGUMENTS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

by uselectors on Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 11:26:05 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.


contact us | volunteer/intern programs | employment opportunities | site map | privacy policy