Reform or Eliminate the Electoral College

Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
Your numbers would tell a different story if it weren't for the top 5 or 6 most populous 'urban' areas.
How can you separate the top 5 or 6 most populous urban areas from their states? Yes, Pennsylvania would be a very different state without Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. But that's like saying, "If my uncle grew tits, would he be my aunt?"
Regardless some reform is in order.
Clearly!
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
All the number tables and graph only show how the electoral college distorts our votes in national elections.

Even worse is the "winner takes all" system that most states (all but Nebraska and Maine) follow. For example, in Florida, 5,297,045 (48.3%) voted for Biden, and 5,668,731 (51.7%) voted for Trump. Yet all 29 of Florida's electoral college votes went for Trump. If the electoral college was abandoned, none of those voters would feel disenfranchised.
Someone should model the results with the same criteria as Maine & Nebraska, so the differences can be seen.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
How can you separate the top 5 or 6 most populous urban areas from their states? Yes, Pennsylvania would be a very different state without Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. But that's like saying, "If my uncle grew tits, would he be my aunt?"
Clearly!
The problem is that the most populous areas negate the rest of the state. While those areas can often be rural, their needs are sometimes left in the dust by areas that have such huge problems that the money needs to be thrown at them. It's unfortunate that the problems are left unsolved, though.
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Spartan
I like what you've suggested, Swerd.
It strikes me that the beginning of this would need to begin with a concerted coordinated effort to clean up congressional districts boundaries (including the breakup of all gerrymandered districts) to meet the basic guidelines and spirit of the goal therein. The Supreme Court seems to largely be of the mindset that this falls to the states... and their gerrymander-protected legislatures... to rectify.
Once that is accomplished, assign electoral votes by congressional district only, not the winner takes all approach.
I would say this might be the simplest way to move this forward, except again... you have to count on the state pols to actually do something for the good of the people rather than themselves.
 
Last edited:
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Field Marshall
The problem is that the most populous areas negate the rest of the state. While those areas can often be rural, their needs are sometimes left in the dust by areas that have such huge problems that the money needs to be thrown at them. It's unfortunate that the problems are left unsolved, though.
1 person 1 equal vote.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
The problem is that the most populous areas negate the rest of the state. While those areas can often be rural, their needs are sometimes left in the dust by areas that have such huge problems that the money needs to be thrown at them. It's unfortunate that the problems are left unsolved, though.
That problem you describe would be a political issue within a state. What Connecticut needs may be quite different from what Iowa needs. It is not relevant to national elections for president and vice president.

Where in the US Constitution does it say the minority rules? Same question for the state constitutions.

To paraphrase Trell, 1 person = 1 vote. The original articles of the US Constitution didn't say that outright, but the overwhelming trend of amendments and federal court decisions since 1792 have been in that direction.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
I like what you've suggested, Swerd.
It strikes me that the beginning of this would need to begin with a concerted coordinated effort to clean up congressional districts boundaries (including the breakup of all gerrymandered districts) to meet the basic guidelines and spirit of the goal therein. The Supreme Court seems to largely be of the mindset that this falls to the states... and their gerrymander-protected legislatures... to rectify.
If I understand the history of this issue correctly, the US Supreme Court has kept it's hands off of issues of state politics. Deciding the locations of districts, both for US Congress and for state government districts, is given to the states and not the federal government. The same is true for the process of running elections.

Several states, to my knowledge, have recently tackled the gerrymandering problem, Pennsylvania and Virginia. In Pennsylvania, the state supreme court ruled that gerrymandered districts must be reapportioned. The GOP controlled legislature refused to do that, and the courts themselves stepped in to reapportion districts. I'm not sure what has happened more recently.

Similar things happened in Virginia. In that state, recent elections have resulted not only in Democratic governors, but in 2018, a Democratic controlled state legislature was elected for the first time since the 1980s or 1990s. They are in the process of creating an Independent Reapportionment Commission, that will replace the politicians in the state house. I hope similar things are occurring in other states. Texas and Wisconsin come to mind, but there are others.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
I don’t think reforming or eliminating the electoral college is the answer. I think what needs to be reformed is gerrymandering, voter suppression which disenfranchises large numbers of voters at the state level.
I agree with this but both issues has to be taken together to be fixed.
 
T

trochetier

Junior Audioholic
EC eliminated or modified depends upon one's view of the Constitution. If it is a document that is written in stone then EC is untouchable. The current SCOTUS will likely rule EC is untouchable.
 
Old Onkyo

Old Onkyo

Audioholic Chief
Your numbers would tell a different story if it weren't for the top 5 or 6 most populous 'urban' areas. Regardless some reform is in order.
I have an idea, since “urban” areas are primarily populated by people of color, and we want to minimize their impact on what the rest of America really wants, can’t we just pass a rule to even things out?

like for every 5 Votes cast in those areas we only count 3?
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Spartan
The easiest way to reform the Electoral College is to reform it at the root of what constitutes an Elector and how they are awarded/assigned. At the State level, the Constitution need not be touched.

Now, how do you get 50 cats to do the right thing?
1610388582848.png
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
EC eliminated or modified depends upon one's view of the Constitution. If it is a document that is written in stone then EC is untouchable. The current SCOTUS will likely rule EC is untouchable.
The 2nd amendment then is also untouchable? Even Scalia stated it can certainly be regulated. So, perhaps EC can be regulated somehow?
 
W

WookieGR

Junior Audioholic
I see no reason to do away with the Electoral Vote, how else are rural evangelical conservative nutjobs supposed to control the entire country with their antiquated and closed minded ideals? Oh wait.. maybe it's better to get rid of it and let democracy prevail every election. Republicans absolutely hate democracy so it's not going anywhere in our lifetimes.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Samurai
Yes, Pennsylvania would be a very different state without Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. But that's like saying, "If my uncle grew tits, would he be my aunt?"
Clearly!
Well since our 'top Doc' here in Pennsyltucky is a he/she I'd say yes your uncle is now your aunt !
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top