OR….California State Senate recognizes Electoral College as elitist anachronism

May 25, 2007 at 9:00 am in Politics

I understand why my fellow b.la’r feels an attempt by the State Senate to shut down the Electoral College is lame. On the surface, the bill seems like a violation of the Constitution (it isn’t). And besides, the Senator carrying the bill got into an embarrassingly ironic car accident (though the bizarre details of that accident were left out). But don’t kill the traffic-weaving messenger. The Electoral College is stupid because when you vote for a President, you’re actually voting for an elector, and that elector doesn’t have to vote the way you asked him/her to vote. Why does that make sense? And before you say “because we live in a representative democracy,” can you tell me who your electors are? What are their names? Why isn’t it that information just a click away?

Yes, we live in a representative democracy. We elect Californians to go to legislatures and vote on stuff on our behalf, saving us from spending our evenings reading about pork futures or anything with “omnibus” in the title. But wait, what about initiatives? You know, those ballot measures for which we get urgent (and annoying) calls to vote a certain way so that kids will be able to breathe or to stop gays from receiving basic rights? Initiatives are a form of direct democracy. If we’re going to have initiatives, then why the hell do we pay legislators to go to Sacramento to do anything? If we want direct democracy, we should just directly vote-by-ballot on every single issue before our state. I mean, we all love to read and dissect the ten or so initiatives that pop up in every election, right?

The fact is, we do not live in a pure representative democracy. We live in a hybrid. And so long as we live in a hybrid, why not have direct election of the President, especially when the Federalist Papers imply the Electoral College was set up to preserve the right of the elite and “landed” classes to control who is President? That is why an elector, by design, can diverge from the popular vote. Isn’t it more fair to have a President that the majority of Americans chose to be their President?

I’m surprised that any Libertarian-leaning, Democratic/Republican-hating, art/tech/grassroots-media/blogger-types would be against such a populist measure. It cuts out the middle man! Then again, it’s easy to yell at politicians that actually make it into the press. I love doing so myself. But the politicians you never hear about are just doing their jobs (like trying to keep feces out of the ocean or fixing a broken foster care system or ensuring auto dealers aren’t ripping you off when your “check engine” light goes on), which makes for really boring copy.

Of course, this bill just dances around a larger issue: whether our votes are actually counted correctly. If they were, Gore would’ve won. Perhaps Kerry too, if this Rove-bot thing is true. Either way, I wouldn’t have gotten my choice. I always vote for Paul Tsongas, even though he’s always dead. Yeah, sure, people say the Electoral College works the majority of the time — that it only diverged from the popular vote twice in the last century. But the last time it did, it really sucked ass.

Before I get flamed in the comments section, please do try to read the actual bill first here. Also, please note that Mark Ridley-Thomas is only one of many, many state politicians that represent Los Angeles in the state legislature. You can find your Senate and Assembly reps by plugging in your zip code on this page.

  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Tumblr

Related posts:

  1. California State Senate agrees to violate U.S. Constitution
  2. Swinging In Nevada
  3. California is a state of mind
  4. Female Solidarity in Election Week
  5. Investment in public higher education is good for the state