by John F Mann

Created on: April 27, 2008   Last Updated: March 28, 2012

Even with electronic voting, counting a hundred million votes across four-plus time zones remains a challenging task. Breaking up a complex problem into smaller, manageable parts is very often the most effective way to reach a solution. The Electoral College is one practical method that allows for a manageable counting process.

I submit that those who now favor a popular vote contest have not made any effort to imagine the very real potential consequences. If popular vote had been used for the 2000 election, the sound of "recount!" would have erupted in every state capitol, not just in Tallahassee.

The Electoral College (and any other similar system) has another important advantage compared to popular vote. That is, for all but the very closest elections, the winning candidate appears to have won by a larger margin, compared to the popular vote. Although this may at first sound ludicrous, consider that scoring in football has the same effect; each touchdown effectively leverages the score, compared to counting a touchdown as only one point.

The Electoral College concept can surely be improved, as discussed below. However, electing a president by popular vote would result in the following changes that most likely will not improve the current system;

1. Greatly increased incentive to buy and sell votes, especially within low income groups.
2. Control of presidential elections by vote-dealers, including well-financed foreign-based dealers
3. Increased incentive for candidates representing one-issue or regional groups, even if a run-off system is instituted.
4. Increased ability to win without appealing to the entire nation.

Popular vote opens up a vast new market for votes. The price of election can then be determined by calculating the cost of each vote. If you are disturbed by money in politics now, you will almost certainly give up in disgust if popular vote rules.

Influence of big-time power brokers who can manage to control groups (blocs) of voters will be greatly increased. There could easily be many more such groups than there are states. It should not take much imagination to foresee that these new vote-dealers will usurp effective control of presidential politics.

Since control of voting blocs would become paramount, one-issue and regional candidates would sprout up like dandelions with each election season. The only practical way to avoid complete collapse of the "system" would be to institute a run off. You can of course imagine the deal-makers salivating

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>