It seems to be that amars major complaint Is that the college was made for and favors white southerners and that the EC diminishes the value of one-man one vote. Yet all his problems seem to be just statements with nothing to back it up. He fails to mention that there were other reasons that the Electoral College was made. Such as our fathers did not want a president dependent on the legislature, so they rejected a parliamentary model in which legislators would pick the prez. Second citizens back then could not be trusted to choose wisely. Laslty becuz the north overpowered the south in population becuz slaves were not aloud to vote. He then makes the generalization that it was created solely for the southerners. So I read his proposal that he made before the supreme court to abolish the ec and he said none of these arguments are valid today I agree. Yet I disagree his with statement that the ec favors southerners. He brings the proof that the first 36 years of the ec most of the prezs were from the south. Yet fails to tell us that the only reason they did so well was becuz they were given a lot of electoral votes for each state becuz they had a lot of slaves, yet the slaves werent aloud to vote. U might ask what about after slavery yet there were still poll taxes and literacy tests. Today since we don’t have either blacks although a minorities nationaly they still can play big roles in election becuz of the ec Minorities tend to live in very populated states like new york and california.
Critics such as Mr. amar of the Electoral College believe that the principle of democratic legitimacy or one man one vote is based on numbers alone. They believe that under the Electoral College the power of your vote is diminished – even to the point where your vote might be wasted if the candidate you voted for doesn’t win the state. In this year’s election approximately 100,000,000 people voted and so it would seem that any one vote is practically insignificant. In a state like Florida, however, which remains undecided and will determine the outcome of this election, the lead is only 300 and it should be apparent that each one of these 300 votes has enormous value. If you would contend that living in a state with only three electoral votes diminishes your vote, consider how much more diminished your vote would be if it were a direct election. You would be one in a hundred million! Under the EC there is at least a chance that ure state can influence the election whereas you by yourself probably couldn’t.
If we did have direct election then the candidates would simply appeal to a majority of the population and win without having to appeal to each state. If we do abolish the Electoral College we will allow candidates the ability to appeal and promise everything to majorities of the voters such as eastern metropolitan voters, white Christians or suburbanites. This would destroy federalism one of the fundamental elements of our constitution. Federalism is the distribution of power in our country between a central government and the states.
In contrast, under the Electoral College, a candidate can’t simply promise everything to one section of the country and neglect another. Each candidate is forced to persuade the voters, state by state. They must address the particular concerns of voters as citizens of those states.
Direct election, which is solely based on numbers, would dramatically reduce the influence of minorities who are the swing votes in closely divided states-groups like farmers who make up 3 percent of the population and blacks who make up 15 percent of the population
The goal of politics in this country is harmony majority rule with minority consent. But you can ask why would minority consent to majority rule. The answer is only if the minority can see that on some occasions and on some vital issues it can be part of the majority. For instance the appointing of two senators from each state not depending on the population of the state. Also there is the state equality principle in voting on constitutional amendments and the three-fourths requirement for passing of amendments. Since the president is a major figure in national interest it is only fair that minorities should be able to influence the election. Mr. Amar claims that the Electoral College is unfair to racial minorities (**does he really claim that?**) but I have shown that racial minorities such as Blacks and Jews can only be heard and not be neglected under the electoral college. Currently they have roles in deciding the state and consequently in choosing the candidates.
