Who holds the Power in America (538 most powerful people in the U.S.A.)
The United States Electoral College is a term used to describe the 538 Presidential electors who meet every four years to cast the "official" votes for President and Vice President of the United States. The Constitution gives each state legislature the plenary power to choose the electors who shall represent its state in the Electoral College. The Electors never meet as a national body. At 51 (Fifty states plus the District of Columbia) separate meetings, held on the same day, the electors cast the electoral votes. As such, the collective concept of the 51 groups is the technical definition of the college. It is because of this power structure that the popular vote was overturned in the 1824, 1876, 1888 and the more recent 2000 Presidential election. What scares me about this system is that it is elitist in nature and has a cloak of anonymity that render them (the Electors) unaccountable to the general masses. The Constitution does not require the Electors to vote as pledged, but many (not all) states have enacted laws that do require their Electors to vote as pledged. This system seems to be in place to assure certain citizens that under no circumstance will an "undesired" candidate be allowed to occupy the highest positions in the land. You may wonder why the forefathers choose to wrest the power from the voting public and give it to these 538 mysterious individuals (who are they?).
There are calls to reform this antiquated system. There are those who truly want to put the power in the hands of the people. The argument for an "Electoral College" is that while the Congress is popularly elected by the people, the President and Vice President are elected to be executives of a federation of independent states. The Electoral College ensures that candidates, particularly in recent elections, pay attention to key 'swing-states' (those states that are not firmly rooted in either the Republican or Democratic party). It equally assures that voters in states that are not believed to be competitive will be disregarded.
Supporters of direct election argue that it would give everyone an equally weighted vote, regardless of what state he or she lives in, and oppose giving disproportionately amplified voting power to voters in states with small populations. Under the current system, the vote of an individual living in a state with three electoral votes is proportionally more influential than the vote of an individual living in a state with a large number of electoral votes.
The arguments for and against get bogged down with historic policy and precedence set throughout elections that are skewed by the history of the United States divisions among its political parties, voters and regions (in other words they filibuster the discussion).
Registered Voter,
Bycha Buxton
Comments
I never understood the electoral college, and now I do...sort of. Thank you, Bycha; this is well spoken.
I agree with your assessment of the anonymity and it being elite. And yes, who ARE these people?
I agree that the founding fathers were skeptical of mob rule. I feel intelligence played a part when it was implemented, position that the uneducated were unable to make wise choices. Today, "uneducated" now translates to "poor". The caste system is alive and well in the US!
And one more question...if their role is to elect a president without making connection to the people, then why do candidates need to spend millions to campaign as if the mass vote matters?
It seems that the whole electoral system should be revamped...not just the electoral college.