Be The Poll — Electoral College

Some top Democrats are split over a bill in the Legislature that would allow Iowa to join a list of states attempting to short-circuit the Electoral College. The measure would give Iowa’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, even if that candidate didn’t win Iowa.

Backers, including Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, say it is needed to make sure we never have a popular vote winner who is an Electoral College loser, like Al Gore in 2000.

Opponents, including Sec. of State Michael Mauro, Gov. Chet Culver and most Republicans, say switching to a popular vote system would diminish the importance of smaller states such as Iowa. Critics also argue that the Electoral Collage can be altered only through a formal constitutional amendment.

So what do you think? How should we choose a president? Electoral College or popular vote?

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

6 responses to “Be The Poll — Electoral College

  1. HawkiJedi

    If you lose by the rules, change them? WRONG!

    The reason for the electoral college was to give less populated states (just like Iowa’s) a more fair role in the process.

    Incentive for Iowa voters would be diminished if we give up the electoral college. Why vote? When the *city* of New York can out-vote our entire state. Do you think NYC would give Iowan’s a moments thought in the voting booth?

    It’s not much, but it does force the Presidential candidates to take our voice seriously.

    It’s obvious Senator Harkin is not serious about having our voice heard. Maybe it’s time for the Iowa non-citizen representative to move on.

  2. DJ

    Electoral Collage? I suppose that’s accurate…

  3. Rob

    Sell our state’s electorial votes. Highest bidder gets the whole kitty.

    Its all about the money, isn’t it?

  4. Citizen

    The electoral colledge is one of the things that makes us a Republic rather than a Democracy. It gives the minority a voice, or in this case a minority state.
    The founding fathers were aware that all pure Democracies have failed because of majority greed. Throughout history once a majority gained total control they have voted themselves the national treasure , leading to total demise. For the same reason the Senate was established with two seats per state.

  5. susan

    National Popular Vote has nothing to do with whether the country has a “republican” form of government or is a “democracy.”

    A “republican” form of government means that the voters do not make laws themselves but, instead, delegate the job to periodically elected officials (Congressmen, Senators, and the President). The United States has a “republican” form of government regardless of whether popular votes for presidential electors are tallied at the state-level (as is currently the case in 48 states) or at district-level (as is currently the case in Maine and Nebraska) or at 50-state-level (as under the National Popular Vote bill).

    If a “republican” form of government means that the presidential electors exercise independent judgment (like the College of Cardinals that elects the Pope), we have had a “democratic” method of electing presidential electors since 1796 (the first contested presidential election). Ever since 1796, presidential candidates have been nominated by a central authority (originally congressional caucuses, and now party conventions) and electors are reliable rubberstamps for the voters of the district or state that elected them.

  6. susan

    The people vote for President now in all 50 states and have done so in most states for 200 years.

    So, the issue raised by the National Popular Vote legislation is not about whether there will be “mob rule” in presidential elections, but whether the “mob” in a handful of closely divided battleground states, such as Florida, get disproportionate attention from presidential candidates, while the “mobs” of the vast majority of states are ignored. In 2004, candidates spent over two thirds of their visits and two-thirds of their money in just 6 states and 99% of their money in just 16 states, while ignoring the rest of the country.

    The current system does NOT provide some kind of check on the “mobs.” There have been 22,000 electoral votes cast since presidential elections became competitive (in 1796), and only 10 have been cast for someone other than the candidate nominated by the elector’s own political party. The electors are dedicated party activists who meet briefly in mid-December to cast their totally predictable votes in accordance with their pre-announced pledges.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s