There has been a great debate over the best way to elect the most powerful person in the world. Republicans want to keep the Electoral College as it is, whereas the Democrats want to bring us closer to Athenian-style direct democracy. While abolishing this institution was once considered a fringe position, mainstream Democratic presidential candidates are making it part of their platform.
Currently, the president is elected by electors from each state. This system is outlined by the U.S. Constitution, and delegates the number of electors to each state’s congressional delegation. Democrats have complained in recent elections about the system currently in place — usually after losing.
This past Friday, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed a bill allowing his state to join with many others in the National Popular Vote, or NPV compact. Colorado is not the first state to join, but it does hold the distinction of becoming the first swing state become a part of it.
According to Roll Call, the National Popular Vote Compact is simply an agreement that states can join that will ensure they vote with the popular vote within their state — not based on population or electors. In essence, if enough states promise to join the compact, it could mean the end of the electoral college as it presently exists.
The District of Columbia, along with 11 other states have also signed on. Some states currently part of the compact include California, now Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Vermont and Washington.
The idea behind the movement is not all together bad. After all, what could be so wrong with wanting the popular vote to prevail in elections? Well, to determine that, one has to go back some time in American history. For example, when this great nation had only 13 colonies, the beliefs and needs of New York were vastly different from those in the other 12 colonies. However, most people resided in that area. Would it have been fair for New York to then determine who the nation elected, per popular vote? No, of course not. Opting to only use the popular vote will end up with just that bizarre of a result.
Consider the 2016 vote to get an idea of what losing the electoral college could look like in a real election today. Clinton had a popular vote of 65,853,514. Trump earned 62,984,828 votes. Now, consider what would’ve happened, had the NPV system been in play. Clinton would have won the election based only on the 3,446,281 she garnered in California. This means California would have affected the electoral votes of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, along with any other state that voted for Trump. This is not only scary, it’s downright unfair and the exact opposite of what the great fathers of the nation would have hoped to see.
If the Electoral College dies and is replaced by something like the NPV compact system, it won’t be long before presidential candidates focus only on Florida, New York and California. After all, if they win them, they don’t have to worry about the rest of the nation. Due to the immense populations within these states, they would have the election almost guaranteed if they won the popular vote in those areas. If a person resides in those states, perhaps they are fine with that outcome. However, for the rest of the nation, the prospect is unsettling to say the least.
The nation should remember its roots and heed the knowledge of the Founding Fathers who were rightfully appalled by direct democracy and the mob rule it enables.
~ Patriotic Freedom Fighter