A few days ago I opined on the Electoral College and a portion of that post is below.
As is typical, we once again hear “We should eliminate the Electoral College and have Presidential elections decided by the popular vote”. This selection process seems to me is just another example of the wisdom of our founding fathers. Where each state gets a proportionate representation in the House of Representatives, with at least one congressperson, but each state receives two senators regardless of the population. These balance the inherent bias toward the states with the larger populations with the need to provide a “Place At The Table” for states with smaller populations.
The beat goes on with some continuing to advocate for the direct election of the President. To show the fallacy in this proposition lets look at a logical extension. Rather than our current allocation of Congresspersons and Senators what if they were allocated on a strict population basis. With no guarantee of the current one Congressperson and two Senators, a number of our smaller states would have NO representation. While the intelligentsia would probably not have any issues with those in what is euphemistically referred to as “Fly Over Land” not being represented my guess is that many would. I am sure that some would insist that this is “different” but it is not. Both are examples of our forefathers working to avoid the “Tierney of the Majority”. Think about it? If all offices, both the President and Congress, were strictly allocated based on population winning in only a few states would allow one faction or the other to control the entire government. Granted we are not all that far away now, but at least there is some protection. By example, the population in the ten most populous states comprises 54.2% of the total USA population according to 2015 data, meaning that the remaining 40 states could be left out in the cold. One only needs to think about two Senators; Tom Daschle and John Thune, both from the small state of South Dakota, that might well be unrepresented if all congressional seats were apportioned on population. Had that been the case we, the USA, would have lost the intelligence and talent these two brought to the fold. By the way, one is a Democrat and the other a Republican.
While I am at it, I might as well throw another log on the fire. Term Limits are long overdue! Our Forefathers envisioned a citizen legislature, not an installed ruling class. However, looking at the current makeup of both the House and Senate we find it filled with career politicians with incumbency almost guaranteeing re-election. My proposal is that no one ever runs for re-election. One four-year term for the House and one eight-year term for the Senate. Just think, rather than working on their re-election on the first day of the term they might have time to actually get something done without the influence of those outside forces needed for reelection.