The Electoral College was established for a very specific reason.
A popular vote would completely disenfranchise rural voters. Their votes would essentially become meaningless. The current system ensures a balance between densely populated cities with millions of people and rural areas with much smaller populations.
At first glance, you might question how this creates balance. Millions on one side and thousands on the other don’t seem fair. But it’s simple: city dwellers and rural residents have vastly different experiences and knowledge bases. City folk generally lack an understanding of farming, and farming folk typically don’t understand inner-city life.
This balance forces candidates to appeal to a diverse range of voters across the nation, both urban and rural, making it impossible to win without broad support.
Even when I argued against the Electoral College when Obama was elected, I was wrong. Liberals controlled the government for eight years due to the Electoral College. They increased the national debt to unprecedented levels by a percentage of GDP, among other issues like the Affordable Care Act, which many criticized for making the middle-class shoulder the cost of insurance for the poor.
Despite my disdain for Obama’s policies, he won within the rules because many women and minorities supported him. Now, the opposite has happened with Trump winning in the same manner, which is acceptable. He has initiated many policy changes aiming to correct what his supporters view as liberal missteps. While not everything is back on track, progress is being made.
If a supermajority of inner-city voters controlled all elections, it would lead to disastrous consequences. Conversely, a supermajority of rural voters dominating the elections would be equally catastrophic. Both scenarios create a situation where one group’s interests completely overshadow those of the other, leading to policies and decisions that fail to consider the diverse needs of the entire population. This kind of overwhelming dominance by any one demographic threatens to destabilize the equilibrium essential for a well-functioning constitutional republic. Without this balance, the nation would be at the mercy of a single perspective, neglecting the valuable contributions and needs of other communities. Such an imbalance could ultimately result in severe societal and economic upheaval, undermining the very foundations of our nation’s stability and prosperity.
Balance is crucial to mitigate extremes from both the far right and the far left. A supermajority should never be allowed so that everyone’s vote has at least some impact on the outcome. The Electoral College is a remarkably insightful and forward-thinking component of the Constitution, maintaining national balance since its inception.
What needs reform is campaign funding. Candidates should all receive the same amount of funding, ensuring the best candidate wins based on merit rather than financial backing.
Copyright 2017 Joel E. Mason