Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 15, 2024, 12:03:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100?  (Read 11502 times)
RouterJockey
Rookie
**
Posts: 61
United States


« on: May 29, 2008, 12:49:30 AM »
« edited: May 29, 2008, 01:20:50 AM by RouterJockey »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would be inclined to disagree.

On the first point - The Bill of Rights, 10th Amendment gives the States the powers (rights?) not granted by the constitution to the federal government nor prohibited by the constitution.  Often referred to as "States Rights".

On the second point - I look at it this way.  By way of the EC, States (not individuals) vote for the offices of President and Vice President.  The number of votes (i.e. Electors) that a State gets is proportional to is Congressional representation.  This is precisely why a candidate can win the "popular vote" by only a small portion within a State, and yet recieve the entire, non-proportional allotment of the State's EC votes.  (ME and NE of course being the exception to the non-proportionality argument).

Furthermore, according to the 12th amendment, if the Presidential election is thrown to the HoR, each State gets one vote for President.
Logged
RouterJockey
Rookie
**
Posts: 61
United States


« Reply #1 on: May 30, 2008, 10:45:22 PM »

I just had a crazy thought regarding the EC.  I think we can draw some parallels between the EC and our income tax system.

Because every state gets 2 extra EVs, it in essence adds a certain amount of "progressiveness" to the system.  Much like income taxes, those that are disadvantaged (poor in PV) are given a leg up, while those that are PV rich are "penalized".

Seems that those that receive an advantage from the EC generally support it, while those that are penalized by the EC don't.
Logged
RouterJockey
Rookie
**
Posts: 61
United States


« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2008, 01:57:41 PM »

I just had a crazy thought regarding the EC.  I think we can draw some parallels between the EC and our income tax system.

Because every state gets 2 extra EVs, it in essence adds a certain amount of "progressiveness" to the system.  Much like income taxes, those that are disadvantaged (poor in PV) are given a leg up, while those that are PV rich are "penalized".

Seems that those that receive an advantage from the EC generally support it, while those that are penalized by the EC don't.

Cheesy

That got me laughing. Thanks.

But that analogy fails on so many levels.

Hey - I did qualify it with saying it was a "crazy thought"...  :-)
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.