The latest enthusiasm from progressive pundits and activists for replacing the American system of self-government is to abolish the Electoral College and choose presidents by national popular vote.
The core function of the Electoral College is to require presidential candidates to appeal to the voters of a sufficient number of large and smaller states, rather than just try to run up big margins in a handful of the biggest states, cities, or regions.
That's bigger than Donald Trump's victory in Texas in 2016; Trump won 18 states with 54 percent or more of the vote in 2016, Hillary Clinton won 10 plus D.C., and the other 22 states were closer than that.
In the two states that gave electoral votes to Stephen Douglas Lincoln won just 26 percent, and he was not even on the ballot elsewhere: He got just 0.9 percent in the eleven states carried by Vice President John Breckinridge and 0.7 percent in the three states carried by John Bell.
The diversity of state electoral systems and eligibility rules was a concern all the way back to the creation of the Electoral College in 1787, and overhauling the system would also create immense pressure to nationalize those systems, at the cost of much expense and controversy.
The German federal republic is composed of states that existed as independent entities long before their unification as a German nation, and whose histories as such have created an electoral system that makes our "Antiquated" Electoral College look like a model of efficiency.
In the early 1800s, it was common for only the newest state to have just three electoral votes, but today there are seven such states, plus D.C. Doubling the size of the House to 870 members would instantly increase all the states to a minimum of four electoral votes and would cut the "Extra" electoral votes almost in half, from 19 percent of the Electoral College to 10 percent.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/what-the-electoral-college-saves-us-from/
The core function of the Electoral College is to require presidential candidates to appeal to the voters of a sufficient number of large and smaller states, rather than just try to run up big margins in a handful of the biggest states, cities, or regions.
That's bigger than Donald Trump's victory in Texas in 2016; Trump won 18 states with 54 percent or more of the vote in 2016, Hillary Clinton won 10 plus D.C., and the other 22 states were closer than that.
In the two states that gave electoral votes to Stephen Douglas Lincoln won just 26 percent, and he was not even on the ballot elsewhere: He got just 0.9 percent in the eleven states carried by Vice President John Breckinridge and 0.7 percent in the three states carried by John Bell.
The diversity of state electoral systems and eligibility rules was a concern all the way back to the creation of the Electoral College in 1787, and overhauling the system would also create immense pressure to nationalize those systems, at the cost of much expense and controversy.
The German federal republic is composed of states that existed as independent entities long before their unification as a German nation, and whose histories as such have created an electoral system that makes our "Antiquated" Electoral College look like a model of efficiency.
In the early 1800s, it was common for only the newest state to have just three electoral votes, but today there are seven such states, plus D.C. Doubling the size of the House to 870 members would instantly increase all the states to a minimum of four electoral votes and would cut the "Extra" electoral votes almost in half, from 19 percent of the Electoral College to 10 percent.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/what-the-electoral-college-saves-us-from/
No comments:
Post a Comment