Abolish the Electoral College System if You Want Your Vote to Count

[radio4progressives]

I have written several posts in various threads recently positing the notion that one of the most important ways to eliminate the problem of the Third Party "Spoiler Vote" for future Presidential Elections, is to first abolish the Electoral College system.

Until the EC is abolished and Proportional Representation method is implemented, there will always be this problem generally speaking. But a problem particularly for the Dems, especially if the party continues to move further and further to the right, progressive will seek out candidates who represent their core values and principles, as evidenced in the past several presidential elections.

I did a quick google search for reference material which might give more backdrop on this issue, for the benefit of those who may be unfamiliar with the EC Abolition Movement and would like to learn more. The first few items i found are somewhat dated, but the substantiative facts remain relevant today.

Also included is a link to a forgotten amendment Dianne Feinstein introduced in the Senate to abolish the EC, very early last year. This article is as interesting as it is helpful.

So here are some links to get started:

http://www.geocities.com/dave_enrich/ctd/ec.html

Here is an article on Dianne Feinstein's amendment, and it too contains related links:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/electoralattack.htm

http://healthandenergy.com/electoral_college.htm

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/


On Proportional Representation:

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/howprwor.htm

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/PRWebSites/PRWebSites.htm


On IRV:

http://www.instantrunoff.com/

http://www.fairvote.org/?page=19


These links are by no way definitive, much more has been written and you can google for even more links -- and i strongly suggest people do that.

My purpose for tossing this out into the public fora, is to advance the promise of a more representative and more participatory democracy, which we have never really known in this country. But in order for us to ever see this promise realized, we must first abolish the EC, and put all of it's trappings firmly behind us.

In that way, we may be able to roll back the state of fascism we are now being subjected to, and perhaps, just perhaps we can move this country FORWARD to a more democratic system which actually values the principles of socio-economic justice and equality for all.


others mileage may vary...

[sirjohn]

1. I'm no scholar...Constitutional ammendment required?

Ratified by the States? Good luck.

[radio4progressives]

3. Well.. consider this

fewer and fewer registered voters even bother going to the polls in presidential elections - when you look at the voting age population in the country, even in 2004 the percentage was dismal everyone agrees. and yes many factors attribute to this problem. but one major factor is that people don't see a candidate they can get behind, and these are people who identify as either Republican or Democrat.

It happens that both parties are experiencing departure from disaffected voters. I haven't researched the stats, but evidence of this is being reported with more frequency than i recall in my life time, which is why we see the triangulation of messages from Democratic party intended to appeal to disaffected "moderate" conservatives, which is a signal for progressives to look elsewhere for thier representation or drop out. Progressives are very politically active, and vote - they are not likely to drop out, but they are likely to look to independents or third parties or both, and the number of democratic party progressives feeling disaffected is growing by the day.

yes it will be a challenge to obtain a 2/3'rds ratification of the states, but not impossible, and that challenge is lessening with every election that passes. The number of Rino's/Dino's is perceived as fairly significant by an active body in each party.

Politics in Washington might be the status quo, but activism has only increased, and so has the polorizations. So this may not be the challenge it once was.

[droidamus]

6. agree but

I agree with getting rid of the electoral college. I agree with expanding to more than 2 viable parties.
I don't think either will help until we can guarantee that the elections are not being rigged i.e. electronic voting a la Diebold. I think the progressives could take a lesson from the far rights playbook. The far right could very easily have deserted the Republican party and gone their own way in the 70's but instead they decide by hook or (mostly) crook to take over the party. That's what the progressives need to do with the Democratic party. Get rid of the Biden, Liberman wishy-washy democrats and get strong progressives into office. So instead of leaving the party work at the grassroots to elect strong progressive candidates. It is not a short term approach it may take years for the local politicians to reach the national level. In the meantime work to beat the Dinos at the primary level and show them that if you won't stand up for what the Democratic party is supposed to support we will find somebody that will.

[radio4progressives]

10. We have to Both at the same time, and we can.

we all are painfully aware of that axiom, attributed to Stalin:
'he who counts the votes, wins' .

But remember this fact, the electoral college does not accurately reflect the votes of the citizens either, hence the red state/blue state syndrome that suddenly appeared in the last ten 15 years which is an absurdity on it's face. with very few exceptions, most states w/should be colored "purple" if ours was an honest and accurate system.

the lesson should be staring all democrats in the face now. It should be obvious as a dead body in the middle of the dining room table.

In these past five years, Democrats are now painfully aware of what it is like to be marginalized by the tyrnanny of what is touted as the "majority" - which most of us know is not really true, but a rigged system portrays that to be the case, and we are powerless to correct the record.

That is the real world definition of Fascism, and Totaliarianism.

When we finally manage to win our battles in abolishing electronic voting machines (if ever - see below) presumably that should result in honest and victorious elections for the Dems, agreed?

However, progressives are not going to be hanging with this party if the next year pans out to resemble anything like the past year(s)and more of them will be seeking representation outside of the party, so that presents the "spoiler" problem which would not exist if EC was abolished and PR was implemented.

It would be a win-win for both Dems and third party.

Dems can go as far to the right to their hearts desire, with no blow back from progressives over it. They can compete fairly in open contests as distinctively different parties.


Note: does anyone here honestly believe that the repukes really make up the majority in this country in terms of population?

[skipos]

7. There were just as many non voters in 2004 as there were in 1972

In both cases about 55% of the voting age voted. Is that because people didn't see a candidate they could get behind in McGovern or Nixon? I wasn't alive then, but there was a pretty large difference between them as far as I can tell.

[radio4progressives]

11. Good question, That's what Water Gate was about..

I was alive, it was my first election and I voted, and then fell into a deep depression like we are now, but moved on.

like the abramoff and the Plame Leak, what happened in 1972 was just as complicated and on the same scale, despite all the reportage that says it was a just few bungled incidents. There was certainly election rigging going on, so frankly i don't trust those stats regardless what is reported in the "official" records, everyone I knew voted.

And by the way, I was a pot smoking, anti-war protesting, bra burning, truth seeking, free spirit.

edited for clarity

[formernaderite]

16. It will never happen....

it does require a constitutional amendment which could never pass. Why would small states screw themselves?

[Silverhair]

2. Impossible. Any 13 states can block a constitutional amendment. NT

[radio4progressives]

4. There may not be 13 to oppose it. n/t

I will also add, that it is largely perceived that the DLC wants this anti-democratic system in place - they see the abolishing EC as threatening to their agenda so some will fight this.

But it gives me hope, when I see Senator Feinstein pushing for this, if ever there was an insider, she certainly is.

[Silverhair]

9. Count the number of states with 3 or 4 electoral votes

Not in alphabetic order:

ID 4
WY 3
MT 3
ND 3
SD 3
ME 4
NH 4
AK 3
HI 4
RI 4
VT 3
NV 4
DE 3

That's 13
UT 5
WV 5
NM 5
AR 6
NE 5
KS 6

These states may be expected to resist.

[radio4progressives]

13. The party leadership would resist, true

But put the question as a ballot intiative and see what the voters would have to say about it.

Indivdiual Citizens of both parties feel strongly disaffected - and/or many disenfranchised. Neither of the two parties are trusted to represent their interests, and All people want real choices, but too often we simply don't have that and this system ensures that.

Imagine if *most* everyone in our country felt they were fairly represented. If you think about the huge diversity of people and cultures in our country, and imagined there were parties that actually represented most of the diversity we have, we'd probably have about a dozen or so parties.

But there will always be at least three maybe four major parties, which would be competeing with the other for the votes. There might even be close elections probably. But if there are close elections, it w/should hold a significant check on the level of arrogance of power and indeed, hold a check against absolute power and fascism which is what we have now.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but that it's closer to a genuine, participatory demcoracy then the joke of the system we have now.

And i think people in these Red States with these tiny EC votes totals would be in favor of it because i do not believe that traditional conservatives and certainly not libertarians feel their party is representing them, and i think they too are hungry for meaningful democracy and representation.

[Silverhair]

17. Imagine that you are a voter in a little state.

The ad on TV says: "If the EC is done away with, then CA, NY, PA & TX will elect the President. The EC make YOU heard."

[radio4progressives]

19. Imagine Those were the states who were the first to demand Abololishing

the EC in the first place? Supposeing those were the states, in their smaller locals were already thinking about that for a long long long time. Supposing their frustrations were based on the notion that the system is rigged to begin with what was needed was to change it, get rid of the EC and the rigged machines!

[Silverhair]

23. Show me how that would be in their interest.

I have not heard of any little states demanding the EC be done away with. A few stray blue activists in a little red state might, but that's about all.

Also, the EC favors the Republicans, and they have great party discipline. Their representatives and senators march in step (usually) while ours wander around. It takes 2/3 majority in both houses to get a constitutional amendment out to the states. Where do you see that majority coming from, given that we are in a minority in both houses?

[radio4progressives]

28. Never said it was easy, this is hard

I'm running errands and will have to respond to this question with the answer that it deserves, because not only is it a excellent question, it is THE key question to the whole shebang .

Because that's going to take a little time for me to respond to, let me leave you with this notion..

we need to start talking about the necessity of it, a lot. we need to argue and debate it and get it out into the public fora all around this country and we need to get on it now..

i'm merely planting seeds, and helping to germinate them.. but that's what we all need to do, because this system is broken and has been for a very long time, and it's not the best in the world. For a country claiming to be a democracy, (i know, but we never say a democratic Republic, do we?)that we have the most un-democratic election process in the world.

[radio4progressives]

5. Related Thread ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2382926&mesg_id=2384245

[mzmolly]

8. Abolish BBV machines if you want to make your vote count.

Priority numero-uno.

[Douglas Carpenter]

12. I am all for it but I am also all for a lot of things that have virtually

no possibility of happening any time in the foreseeable future. I am also all for converting the world into a community of democratically run workers cooperatives -- which is about as likely as abolishing the electoral college and adopting proportional representation--any time prior to the collapse of the current system.

I'm afraid it's a good idea that simply has no chance of happening baring catastrophic events which I don't particularly want to see either.

There is just too much vested interest in maintaining the system as it is with only the most modest modifications.

Sorry if I sound skeptical. But I just don't think it is currently in the range of even remote possibilities

[radio4progressives]

14. I would only ask that you keep an open mind, and try to imagine

how much of an improvement it would be for our country's democracy. And keep an open mind as the notion, that more people actually oppose the EC, (and i'm including traditional Conservatives and Libertarians in this)who have thought about this problem for decades.

As for Co-operatives, i'm with you. Unfortunately, only progressives are AWARE of what that is about, where as the EC issue is on the minds of far more voters than most might think.

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. trust me I am open minded about it and I do consider it a more

democratic alternative and personally would welcome it enthusiastically But changing something so fundamental to our constitutional system is far more difficult than simply passing an ordinary constitutional amendment and that is .... well let's just say that I think it unlikely..but I would love my prediction to be proved wrong.

[radio4progressives]

21. I understand. Just the filibuster is unlikely.. we will move forward one

step, and backward 40. and so on..

cheers!

[Telly Savalas]

15. What's the argument against actual run-off elections

instead of instant run-offs? (Y'know: if a candidate wins a majority then all is done, but if no candidate gets a majority there's a run-off between the top two contenders a couple of weeks later.)

A number of countries have these and they work fairly well. Unlike IRV it gives voters a chance to do straight shopping comparison on the two frontrunners without distractions. Granted, it's more expensive to implement than IRV, but should that really be an issue when we're dealing with our democracy?

[radio4progressives]

20. I agree, Instant Recall would have saved us Much Grief in 2000 and 2004

I'm not sure if that would require a constitutional amendment or if that method could be implemented vis a vis statute through legislation.

On the other hand, it almost seems laughable to be talking about honoring the constitution, when it is all been utterly destroyed by this current regime occupying the white house and Congress.

We no longer have a Bill of Rights, and the first several articles of the constitution is essentially been allowed to be ignored by all three branches.

It could be argued, since we are no longer governed under the Constituion, because the president nullified it, then we should just do whatever the hell we want to now, if the those who rule us can ignore the constitution, why should we consider it a viable document governing our nation?

[radio4progressives]

22. Strike Out IRV! Choose Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping (CSSD)

It's apparently too late for me to edit my OP, to add these links, so i'm doing it in this thread.

Apparently IRV has some weaknesses which makes it vulnerable to corruption and abuse, so instead of advocating IRV, we must look to methods with integrity and from today's research and a different discussion board, all sources say that CSSD and Ranked Pairs are the preference methods to select and to avoid IRV at all cost.

Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping (CSSD):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method


Ranked Pairs (RP):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_Pairs

[win_in_06]

24. In order to overturn the EC smaller states would have to vote themselves

out of influence.

Many less populated states would not have much of a voice if not for the EC.

I guess it depends on if you see us as one federation or a group of semi-independent states.

By setting up the EC, it would seem that the founders envisioned the latter.

[radio4progressives]

26. Proportional Representation Gives Smaller Groups a Voice

That's the whole point of that method. Proportional Representation deals precisely with these issues, it was created in order to share power as opposed to the system we have in place, which has been abused to the point where it has fostered and helped create a fascist totalitarian despotic regime with Absolute Power.

[robbedvoter]

25. True, but it still may be swallowed by Diebold.

But I agree. Some survivalist's vote in Idaho counts 10 times as much as mine in NYC - both in the Senate and in presidential elections. In civilized countries votes are equal, Since the 19th century. And direct.

[radio4progressives]

27. We have to abolish both

People are working really hard, and are really dedicated on a state by state basis with regard to abolishing electronic voting machines, but it's a very difficult challenge, because the fascists who own it are in power, and do want to give it up.

[Max Cherry]

29. I agree....

ONE MAN ONE VOTE!!!!