5 Reasons to Keep the Electoral College - Daniel Lowenstein

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2008/10/24/The_Electoral_College_and_National_Popular_Vote

UCLA Law Professor Daniel Lowenstein offers five arguments to maintain the Electoral College as the method for choosing the President of the United States.

-----

The Electoral College was developed by our founding fathers and enshrined in the Constitution as a system of checks and balances to ensure a fair outcome in the choosing of our presidents.

However, the highly publicized 2000 presidential election, in which Al Gore may have won the popular vote but lost the contest to George W. Bush, galvanized those who wish to see the Electoral College scrapped in favor of a national popular vote.

Come hear our panel of distinguished experts discuss the merits and pitfalls of the two systems, and the wisdom of moving from a tried and true process to something new - The Commonwealth Club of California

Daniel Lowenstein teaches Election Law, Statutory Interpretation & Legislative Process, Political Theory, and Law & Literature. A leading expert on election law, he has represented members of the House of Representatives in litigation regarding reapportionment and the constitutionality of term limits. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the award-winning theatre troupe Interact and regularly brings the company to the School of Law to perform plays with legal themes, such as Sophocles' Antigone, Ibsen's Rosmerholm, and Wouk's The Caine Mutiny Court Martial.

Professor Lowenstein worked as a staff attorney at California Rural Legal Assistance for two and one-half years. While working for California's Secretary of State, Edmund G. Brown Jr. in 1971, he specialized in election law, and was the main drafter of the Political Reform Act, an initiative statute that California voters approved in 1974, thereby creating a new Fair Political Practices Commission. Governor Brown appointed Professor Lowenstein as first chairman of the Commission. He has served on the national governing board of Common Cause and has been a board member and a vice president of Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• national
• popular
• vote
• bill
• electoral
• college
• voting
• voters
• election
• elections
• elect
• president
• presidential
• united
• states
• america
• representative
• representatives
• government
• fora.tv
• foratv
• fora
• tv

[Hooya2]

While I agree that a national recount would be a major problem, I believe the current set-up of the election presents a far worse possibility; the possibility that a man who wins the national majority might not win the presidency. It's happened before, and it may happen again.

When a system is capable of electing a president when the majority of voters are for another candidate, the system needs to be fixed, plain and simple.

[comradepinko]

The chances of a super close vote in one state are much higher with state races than one super tight race nation wide with a national popular vote.

The chances of the problem are reduced but the scope is widened. That's hardly a convincing reason, but then again none of his reasons were good.

[comradepinko]

@MrBobisawesome5 Thanks for that well thought out reply. You're an idiot.

[rdcress1]

@MrBobisawesome5 Oh, your argument is so powerful I've just changed my mind!

[HuskyHero133]

@Hooya2 Plain and simple fact is that you "fixing" the electoral system would mean an end to the US experiment of self government. No joke. It would mean an end to federalism and an end to checks and balances that occur to curb the real threat of the tyranny of the majority.

I wish people would understand why Madison and the other founders created the nation and its constitution the way they did. THE POPULAR VOTE HAS NOTHING TO DO WHO THE PRESIDENT IS! The states elect the President.

[darkmiles22]

@rdcress1 A constitutional republic restricts the tyranny of the majority just fine. Giving power to less populous states wouldn't prevent tyranny in the slightest; it would only shift the tyranny from the majority to those select small states.

You say that "it balances the power of the states," but states are artificial organs for representing the people. States don't have rights; people have rights. People deserve equal voting rights, not states.

[stebecool]

I can't believe that no one has mentioned weather. Imagine if at election time, there is an early snowstorm or just inclement weather that keeps turnout low in liberal northeast or west coast states or some inclement weather in southern conservative states on election day. That could significantly sway the outcome of the election. The electoral college makes sure that each state will always get its fair share of votes no matter what. This might be the biggest reason to keep the system as it is.

[rdcress1]

@darkmiles22 That's the whole point. It balances the power of the states. It does not diminish the power of the big states since they receive additional votes based on the number of representative seats held. Therefore they still have more voting power. Besides what you advocate is simple majority rule. Do you truly wish this since the table can turn and you might be in the minority. How about lets just go to a simple majority vote for president rather than a plurality.

[rdcress1]

Maybe we should just find some way to increase the weight of the votes cast by those who pay no income tax and those who live on government subsidies. Then we could increase the influence of the multinational corporations and banks and unions on congress. Then reduce the weight of the votes for the working class and we'll just print money at will and sit around chanting and wiggling our fingers in the air. This issue is a no brainer - no need to change the EC - there's ultimately no benefit.

[rdcress1]

There is not a single good reason to eliminate the electoral college. All the rhetoric about voters being disenfranchised is just that - meaningless rhetoric. What great effect would eliminating the EC have on the U.S. other than allowing the large population centers to elect their candidate or allowing the election of a charismatic socialist bent on destroying this nation... oh... wait... I think that's already happened.

[MrBobisawesome5]

@comradepinko your wrong



[macarion]

This is complete bullshit. I'd like to take a shit into this guy's mouth.