Should the Electoral College Be Abolished?

The problem is that the intent of the founders has become subverted. The original concept was that the state legislatures would pick the electors who would pick the President. This concept actually existed up to about the American Civil War.After that, elections increasingly were handed over to the voters in general and the electoral college atrophied.Rather than the best the country could offer, we received the best that money could buy.Compare the first ten presidents to the last ten presidents.Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Jackson, Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, and Polk. I did not include Tyler as he was not elected president.Compare that list to the last ten elected. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Clinton, George Bush, Obama or McCain. I left out Ford who was never elected.The lists have no comparison as to quality.

The founder devised the system, as GTH correctly said, to "filter" or "channel" (metaphors from the Federalist) the democratic voice. It's basically a check on democracy, which worked as long as the power of the Presidency was counterbalanced by the democratically elected Congress. And I agree with GTH that democracy is not an unmitigated good. The problem is that, since the days of the founders, the President has gained vastly more power than the Congress. With America's turn toward un-Constitutional ideas like national sovereignty, there is hardly a check on executive power anymore. Even if the Congress managed to talk tougher, it would hardly matter because their power has been so eviscerated. And the President's party agents have even managed to intimidate the judiciary to the point where this last check on executive power has been vastly reduced. So, as long as the President runs almost everything, the voice of the people needs to be heeded as carefully as possible. When the Pres... Read more

Never. One of the best legacy our forefathers left us is the Electoral College.

As much as the Electoral College system is controversial, eliminating it would be disastrous consequences- and its implications immeasurable (negatively). First and foremost, an Electoral College system helps maintain a federal system of government and equal representation (a cornerstone to our democratic ideals). Secondly, the Electoral College system serves to promote the cohesiveness of the nation by requiring the equal distribution of popular support in order for any one individual candidate to be elected to the Presidency. Without this system in place, larger metropolitan areas or more populous states and regions would drown out more rural and less populated ones. The Electoral College system serves to balance the interests of all states and regions within during a Presidential election. Finally, the Electoral College system enhances the status of minorities (in effect a VOICE) because their vote can always make the difference, especially in close, contested elections- and whether... Read more

No. . .it's failed once or twice in 200+ years- that's not enough to junk the system. . .

Psst... if we did this and went by popular vote, the ten largest cities would decide every election and a large portion of voters needs would go ignored. Hmm...

Absolutely, with one proviso. If all of the signers of the original US Constitution can be resurrected and convinced that the system they instituted, so many years ago, is fundamentally flawed. They would, apparently, be the only people who truly understood its value and I'd go along if THEY were convinced that it doesn't work. (It doesn't work?)

California, New York, Texas-the three largest states are ignored in Presidential elections. Add to that New Jersey, Maryland, Delawere, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, just to name a few! Why should the 'swing states' get all the attention? Abolish it I say.

The electoral college was written into the Constitution because some fat rich guy back in the day wanted to stack the deck against common folk like me. One man, one vote, and damn this particular college.

I believe many elections have a low voter turnout simply because alot of people feel their votes don't count...and, depending where they live, they are usually right. Kill the electoral college and let everybodys' vote count.

I recently completed a research essay on the way America votes and how do we fix it. Below is part of that essay. The sweeping idea of reform in the way America elects the president, has become vocal since the ill fated elections of 2000 and 2004. In the 2004 United State's Presidential Election, only thirty five seats out of the four hundred and thirty five seats remain as undecided and thus a minority of voters determined the winner of the presidential election. (Dunham R. S., Walczak L., Dwyer P., McNamee M., Starr A., 2004) Disenfranchisement of voters occur as the number of swing states, those states not considered as already decided, dwindle to only seventeen or eighteen. For Democracy to survive in America there is the need to bring the voice of the American people back into American politics. The Electoral College is based on an undemocratic notion that the geographic few should have a louder voice, and in this, the new millennium, stronger resolve is necessary to bring a... Read more

Absolutely. People say that it would lessen the importance of smaller states. That makes no sense at all. If the electoral college were abolished, it would make it so that NO individiual states would matter at all (as far as electins go). It would be more of a true national election. Think about it, take i don't know, Wyoming. The least populus state. Now, with the electoral college, they only have 2 electoral votes. Because of this, candidates spend very little time campagining there and the citizens of that and many other states with small populations; Vermont, Delaware, Montana etc. But if there were no electoral votes, they would have to campaign EVERYWHERE to get the INDIVIDUAL'S vote. The VOTER'S vote, and not the ELECTOR'S or the STATE's vote. Jed1000 sums it up perfectly. ONE MAN ONE VOTE!.......... Somebody please tell me how the stupid idea that abolishing the electoral votes would lessen smaller states importance because that is the most unsubstantiated and ridiculous point ... Read more

I believe it should be, yes. It boggles my mind that it's possible to win the popular vote, but lose the election. If every votes counts, then why doesn't EVERY VOTE COUNT? Right not it seems to me that 200 some odd votes count, and I don't get to place any of them. Perhaps if the EC were abolished, then I'd vote, and consider myself proud to do so.

We are the United States of America, not the People's Republic of America. When a state joins the union, it is a contractual agreement where the state is guaranteed it will retain much independence, a fair chance to bring its concerns before Congress, equal footing to all other states in the Senate, and the right to cast that state's votes for President in exchange for forgoing certain interests to the federal government. The EC was intended as a means of keeping power spread out across the nation instead of concentrated in just certain regions of the country. We are in reality a nation of 50 little countries operating under one federal government's banner -and the President is the only office in which it is the states who determine who will lead over all the states. The President is the elected representative of the STATES, not of the people -and that is because we are the United States and not the People's Republic. If we abolish the EC, aside from the need to change our nation'... Read more

definitely not. the electoral college insures that a person's vote in alaska is as important as a person's vote in california. the combination of the popular vote and the electoral college is a much better barometer of public opinion than the popular vote alone.

Yes, it should. Anything other than one man.. one vote goes against everything I believe in.

Never! If you do that, then the next time we have a mess like we had in Florida in 2000, it will take place everywhere, instead of just in one state.

Oh yeah, I really want California, Ohio, Florida, and New york deciding all the presidential elections.