- Sep 28, 2018
One strategy that has been proposed is to pass conditional laws that only kick in if all the other states also sign them. Which doesn't seem like it would be too difficult if there were some education on the subject, but when you do it after a huge EC upset, you end up with a lot of people out there that think the EC helps them, rather than it being more or less a product of the winds.
So now this proposal is a sort of compromise to get it done where you don't need every state to sign, just enough to essentially render the rest moot. This is easier to get done, but it's also kind of dangerous because the number of states and the number of electors can change.
Look, if you want to be pedantic about it, "random" may not be technically correct but it's arbitrary, ever-changing, and bearing no particular allegiance to any party or demographic, which, for the purpose of this conversation, is essentially random.
Sure, it’s a compromise that is more possible, but it is also a solution that is worse than the status quo, in my opinion.
As I said before, I find any attempt at a popular vote to be nakedly partisan in its intentions. Though it may theoretically be more represtative of the country as a whole, I believe that it would be less meaningfully representative.
As an example, consider minority majority districts today. That minority may be small in comparison to the majority in the state, but we purposefully build our voting districts to represent them in a meaningful way. The electoral college is very similar to this in practice. Sometimes the little guy needs a bigger voice than others to ensure that the country is represented in a meaningful way.