Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77
If we are going to do that, we should just go to a national popular vote.
|
No, there is actually a big difference.
One is that
all federal voting is set up in the Constitution as a state matter. The states determine their own voting process for all federal races (although the presidential and vice presidential positions are the only elected positions that are not specifically state-based).
The intent was to prevent highly populated states from running rough-shod over sparsely populated states. People can complain "that was because of slavery," but in fact, different states continue to have different interests based on demographics and geography. A federal water management system that would benefit California, for instance, might wreak havoc on Nevada; an international agricultural agreement that might benefit New York might devastate Kansas.
So it's still important that less populous states carry weight in elections, and the Electoral College system of allowing each state to submit its choice for president is still valid.
But apportioning that vote according to the popular vote within the state would balance the rural versus urban situation as it affects that particular state.