To understand the danger of enacting this proposal (see link)
endorsed by the president, secretary of state and others, consider
two vital points.
The United States is a republic; NOT a democracy as it is routinely referred to. As the founders stated repeatedly and as evidenced by history they were determined to avoid founding our nation as a democracy. Their rationale was simple. Democracies end up in mob rule; that is, a majority of 50.01% assume dictatorial control over the rest of the population. Consequently, majority rule is a bad idea in the electoral process. Those in the minority have no voice in who becomes president.
If we were to have a majority rule process, candidates for the presidency would no longer have to appeal to the broader voting public to be elected. The states with large urban population centers would be the focus of all campaigns. The result would be campaigns limited to states such as New York, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and California - states with large population centers. States with large agricultural/ rural populations on the other hand would be ignored - their relatively small voting populations would not be worthwhile pursuing - their votes would be meaningless. So, we would become a nation whose electoral focus would be limited to satisfying the interests of urban centers. That would spell disaster.
The electoral college process distributes votes in such a way as to give voice to all states, not just a few. That is why presidential candidates must consider and be responsive to the interests of all the nation's citizens and why so much focus is given to garnering electoral college votes.
George Burns
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/264347-obama-clinton-backed-reforms-to-electoral-college-after-bush-v-gore
The United States is a republic; NOT a democracy as it is routinely referred to. As the founders stated repeatedly and as evidenced by history they were determined to avoid founding our nation as a democracy. Their rationale was simple. Democracies end up in mob rule; that is, a majority of 50.01% assume dictatorial control over the rest of the population. Consequently, majority rule is a bad idea in the electoral process. Those in the minority have no voice in who becomes president.
If we were to have a majority rule process, candidates for the presidency would no longer have to appeal to the broader voting public to be elected. The states with large urban population centers would be the focus of all campaigns. The result would be campaigns limited to states such as New York, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and California - states with large population centers. States with large agricultural/ rural populations on the other hand would be ignored - their relatively small voting populations would not be worthwhile pursuing - their votes would be meaningless. So, we would become a nation whose electoral focus would be limited to satisfying the interests of urban centers. That would spell disaster.
The electoral college process distributes votes in such a way as to give voice to all states, not just a few. That is why presidential candidates must consider and be responsive to the interests of all the nation's citizens and why so much focus is given to garnering electoral college votes.
George Burns
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/264347-obama-clinton-backed-reforms-to-electoral-college-after-bush-v-gore
No comments:
Post a Comment