Return to my Issues and Opinions pages
Go to my home page
© Copyright 2003, Jim Loy
I favor straight popular election of the President. Other people favor something closer to what we have now, where if 51% of the voters in New York vote for candidate A, then that state votes 100% for candidate A. Regardless, I think that the Electoral College, which elects the President and Vice President is a joke, and should be replaced with something better.
When you mark your vote (on your ballot) for presidential candidate A, you are not actually voting for candidate A, but you are instead voting for an elector (whose name is probably not on the ballet, and who was chosen by candidate A's political party in your state) who has pledged to vote for candidate A. When the popular votes in your state are added up, if the majority of the voters voted for candidate A, then all of the electors who pledged to candidate A are elected, and then they vote for the candidate A (supposedly). They are not required by law to vote for candidate A, but they normally do so. On several occasions, "faithless electors" have voted for different candidates than they have pledge to, but they have always done this in order to make a political statement when their vote "did not count" because the election had already been decided one way or another. I think such a political statement is a slap in the face of the voters, who now find themselves unrepresented by the elector who they elected.
I think this process has several obvious flaws:
The Electoral College is just an unnecessary step in the election process. No matter how we choose to tally the votes (apportioned as it is now, or popular vote), we don't need an Electoral College.