Turning off the electoral vote.

[vicarofrevelwood]

This is part of a letter to the editor of the Trenton Times, of Trenton NJ.It was in response to eliminating the Electoral collage.


The fact that the Electoral College vote is based upon the numbers of representatives in the house plus 2 senators from each state is correct. However this is based on the number of people being represented by each House member, currently at 700,000 Per. Let me explain why this is so important.
At the time of the constitution’s signing, we had one House member for every 30,000 citizens, this was the constitutional mandate. By the time the house capped itself in 1911 it was almost at 200,000 per House member, Due to population growth from the census before in 1900 to 1910. What did our esteemed House do? Well Instead of voting on a ratio of how many citizens per House member, after the 1910 census as directed by the constitution, the federalist papers and the house rules at the time. These self important thieves chose the low road and robbed the people of their representation, capping the House at 435 members. As a result of the expanding House districts, there has been an insidious and substantial disenfranchisement of the voter. We are today the second worst represented republic in the world. Do you, or did you ever wonder why your voice doesn’t seem to count? Well wonder no more my friends.
Today we have one house member for every 700,000 people. I’d like to make another relevant point here. This is an average; the numbers for each representative varies so much the congressional district rule* has all but been abandoned. SO THIS QUESTION STANDS AND DEMANDS TO BE ANSWERED, Why are the 525,000 citizens in Rode Island politically equal to 745,000 in Utah?
Since the House Cap in 1911 we have added 4 states to the Union, and 200,000,000 people. What are some of the net results? We now have 5 states with only 1 representative each and the voting of the Electoral College now no longer reflects the will of the people as it has done in the past. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
To do away with the Electoral College is a folly! From the citizens point of view it’s just another way the individual House members retain His/Her powerful little fiefdoms, with benefits to make us working folk scream in rage. What should we the people do? Well if we enlarged the House, lower the ratio of people to representatives this will diminish their power base, their by make them more responsive to the newer smaller districts. House members will be harder to corrupt, and will much less likely be able to pander to various demographics in each of the newer smaller districts. Unlike the over sized districts we have today. ( not my Words But G. Washington’s at the constitutional debate.) Then to reflect the new enlarged size of the House we would have a new enlarged Electoral College, more likely to reflect the view of the general population. This would End the Electoral College problem constitutionally without going through 37 states to do so.
For More information on this and other problems dealing with a constricted House size, Please see the web pamphlet at, Http//www.thirty-thousand.org. Explore this and other reasons why the House of Representatives does not represent you! Then write your House member!

* THE “CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT RULE” REQUIRES STRICT EQUALITY OF POPULATION FOR EACH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. THIS RULE COMES FROM ARTICLE I OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND IT REQUIRES CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS TO BE “AS MATHEMATICALLY EQUAL AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE.” The purpose of this principle is to prevent politicians from unfairly dividing political power among districts of different sizes as UNEQUAL REPRESENTATION EXAGGERATES THE VOTING POWER OF THOSE IN SMALLER DISTRICTS AT THE EXPENSE OF THOSE IN LARGER DISTRICTS.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. "To do away with the Electoral College is a folly!"

No it isn't. I agree that the HR needs to return to the 30,000-1 ratio. At the same time, and for similar reasons, we should elect the president by direct popular vote with a requirement for a majority rather than a plurality and an instant run-off ballot system to accomplish that.

[just55650]

5. agreed

[WAFS]

6. Good post. n/t

[tnlurker]

2. K&R

Nicely done

Do you mind if I steal this?

[roberto IS beto]

3. my math shows 10,000

Maybe I did the math wrong, but if we have 300,000,000 citizens, and there is one congressional representative for every 30,000 citizens, that equals 10,000 members in the House of Representatives.

[Cereal Kyller]

4. Yeah

You're right

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GESICC]

8. No one even knows what the EC is

I say we establish some criteria for what we want in our
candidates, (good work history, no criminal record, ...) and
draw candidates by lottery, then let the competition for votes
begin.  (OK, not so seriously:o)
But how about we insist all campaign contributions be
anonymous?  This is a little off topic, or is it?