|
Bleeding Heartland
It's what plants crave.
|
Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 09:40:01 AM CST
|
(I also support directly electing the president. This bill is a step in the right direction. - promoted by desmoinesdem)
The Iowa Senate's state government committee has approved the bill that would move the USA away from the archaic electoral college. I was quite surprised--but pleased--to hear from Jack Kibbie last week that this might happen.
Most Americans think the electoral college is a mistake. Apparently the whole world agrees, because no other country has ever copied this 200 year old method of choosing a leader. It's really a relic of the free-state, slave-state compromises that were made in writing the Constitution. Until now it's been impossible to get rid of it, because it's so hard to amend the Constitution.
The new idea is to sign up states in a contract to cast their electoral votes as a group with all the votes going to the winner of the national popular vote (NPV). If Iowa joins the group, we'll vote for the national winner even if another candidate did better in Iowa. This plan will go into effect when the group controls the majority of the electoral college votes. Ingenious!
Skeptics always assert that the electoral college protects us and other small states. This not true. Research into where candidates spend their time and money in the 90 days before a Presidential election proves they don't go to small states unless they are also swing states, such as Nevada in 2008. Who campaigned in Rhode Island or Wyoming? No one did, because they are not swing states.
So far only four states have joined---Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and Hawaii. These are states that usually get ignored by Presidential candidates, so I can see why they passed it. Iowa has been a swing state, the center of much spending and campaigning. If the electoral college is kaput, we may get less attention. That's why I was surprised to see the bill gaining ground here. Time to get cynical . . . .
Why would we pass this bill? Isn't this carrying good government a little too far? (snark)
Maybe it has to do with the caucuses. We barely defended our caucus timeline in 2008 from attacks by Florida and Micigan. We get double attention in Iowa as both the first caucus and as a swing state. If we are generous enough to forego the swing state advantage, maybe the voters elsewhere won't keep beating on our caucus advantage.
Or maybe we see our swing-state status eroding. If Iowa becomes reliably Democratic(voted for the D five times of the last six elections), candidates won't come here in election years, only in caucus years. Going to the NPV could bring the candidates back since those many Iowa independents and Republicans would not be disenfrancised in a NPV system.
Whatever the motive--good government or selfish government--I'm glad for the progress. I hope the full Senate approves it, too.
------cross posted from IowaVoters.org
|
| IowaVoter :: Senate Advances Popular Vote |
|
|
|
![[Bleeding Heartland Logo]](http://www.bleedingheartland.com/upload/logo.jpg){kind=logo}
