John Nichols’ criticizes the Electoral College as an ancient
relic which frustrates democracy, but The United States is a republic respecting
majority rule and minority rights.
Fearing the tyranny of the majority, along with the autocracy
of the elite, and the mania of a monarch, the Framers intended that popular
vote would only elect House of Representatives. State legislatures would elect
the Senators, since the upper chamber would represent the interests of the states.
As for the President, the Constitutional Convention wanted an executive selected
based on his credentials, his caliber, and his character. In short, they
presciently envisioned George Washington as the first President, then every
subsequent Presidential candidate would reflect the same collection of
characteristics.
Therefore, because the Framers wanted to reduce the
influence of direct democracy in Presidential elections, complete with its pandering
populism and insensate emotionalism, they favored his indirect election.
Rejecting a parliamentary system in which the House of Representatives would select
the President, and fearing the complicating delays from a direct popular vote,
the Framers enacted the electoral college, a separate caucus which would deliberate
separately and chose a qualified, not just popular, President.
Today, the Electoral College minimizes complications by focusing
recounts on one state instead of sifting through the entire country. The best
reform would allocate an electoral vote for each Congressional district, with
two for the winner of the statewide popular vote. This method would diminish the
disparity between popular and electoral votes while maintaining the integrity of
the final tally.
No comments:
Post a Comment