The Electorial College - March 11, 2011

[Gary Gilbert]

The Electoral College was created as part of the Constitutional convention of 1786 and was intended to reflect the physical reality and social attitudes of the time. Distances were vast, communication slow, and commoners were expected to defer to their betters.
The 1788 election was the first use of the college. States could split their votes. In that election, 137 votes from 10 states were cast for 12 different candidates. Vermont had 3 votes or 2 percent of the total.

Today, the rapid flow of information has compressed distances and we now value the opinions of all citizens. But the value of our votes has diminished. In the 2008 election, 538 votes were cast by 50 states between two candidates. Only two states split their votes.  Vermont’s 3 votes were only.one-half of a percent of that total.

A President can now be elected by only winning 11 states. Candidates will cater to the states that have the votes; states with higher populations and large cities. Federal policies are reflective of the needs of those states not small or rural states. The question is whether to continue a process where Vermont has limited influence or to pool our votes with other states creating the possibility of selecting a President who campaigned on a national level and is willing to present policies representative of all our citizens and states rather than just those with the most Electoral votes. A national popular vote is worth considering to retain the qualities we value in Vermont.


Representative Gary Gilbert
Fairfax/Georgia
March 11, 2011
849-6333

[rod anode]

you need to worry about this states problems and what your gonna tax next to makeup the 500 million the state is short to balance the budget

[fletchtb]

Mr. Gilbert,

Respectfully, I must disagree with your position.

While your math is correct that Vermont's 3 of the 538 votes in the electoral college equals 0.56% of the body that elects our President and Vice President, the proportion of Vermont's population to the entire US population is much smaller. According to the the 2010 US Census, Vermont's population was 625,741 (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php). The same census declared the population of the United States of America to be 308,745,538 in 2010. Vermont's percentage of the overall US population is actually 0.20% (625,741 / 308,745,538). In reality the electoral college systems boosts Vermont's per capita influence on the election of our president and vice president by 275%.

The electoral college system was not designed by our forefathers so that the beliefs of commoners could be deferred their betters, but it was designed to balance the power and needs between more densely populated urban states and sparsely populated rural states. While it is true that a president could be elected by winning the popular vote in the 11 most populous states in the country that outcome unlikely, and it necessitates the need for a nationwide campaign. Vermont does not get a lot of attention on from presidential candidates, but if Vermont passes a law to vote in the electoral college based on the results of the national popular vote then a visit to Vermont becomes even less important. A presidential candidate could never set foot in Vermont and not even get a single vote and still count on our electoral votes if they knew they could win the popular vote.

Regardless of a person's politics, I think Vermonters would be upset in a situation where the final tally of the state's presidential votes did not align with the national popular vote. I understand many Vermonters were upset when Al Gore lost the election to George W. Bush in 2000 even though Gore won the popular vote. How would those Vermonters who voted for John Kerry in 2004 have felt if our state's electoral votes were cast for George W. Bush (who won the popular vote) even though the state favored John Kerry by an almost 10% margin?

I truly believe that our forefathers knew what they were doing when they established our government. While the existence of the electoral college may seem counterintuitive to many, it was put in place to protect the interests of a state like Vermont. Any action to undo the well thought out work of our forefathers would be a tragedy. I can only hope that I have had some influence on your opinion regarding this topic. More importantly, I hope that I have convinced your constituents (as I am a resident of Fletcher) that a change to how Vermont participates in our nation's electoral college would have a profound negative impact on our state's role in presidential elections.

Respectfully,
Todd Baumeister

[Chris Santee]

Todd's math is better than Rod's math
but I must agree with both points !

[Thor]

Gary,

     Just out of curiousity; what are the qualities that you value in Vermont that would benefit from or retain in a national popular vote?

Ed,

     Please stop using your calculator to determine how fupped up our deficit is. I am running low on blood pressure medicine!!

Todd,

     Well stated.

[Stand Alone Defense]

To be honnest after seeing what the majority of peoples political views are in Vermont(Very Liberal).  I'm kind of glad we don't have much pull I think we would probably just do more bad then good.  Just my opinion

[rod anode]

thor add up all the positions that he has {shummie} added to the payroll  then tell me my math is wrong

[Thor]

Ed,

     I never said your math was wrong. I just told you to stop telling me what it is, as I am running low on medicine!!!

Chris, Todd,

     Although Todd's numbers look good, his math (or text) is wrong. Vermont is not .20 of the total US population. Vermont is just over .002 (2%) of the population.

Josh,

     You nailed it!

And I am not sure if you guys have ever heard this quote before... something like this.... " a politician worries about the next election,  a statesman worries about the next generation".

[fletchtb]

Thor,

Please check your math again. 0.002 equals 2 thousendths of 1 or 0.2%.

[rod anode]

my bad so sorry

[Chris Santee]

Awaiting Gary's comments:
http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=50727

[Chris Santee]

and more............
http://newsentinelreport.wordpress.com/category/national-popular-vote-plan-npv/

[David Shea]

Electorial College is obsolete.  Currently an individual vote in each state, for a national election, does not count for anything if it is not a majority. 

I would much rather my vote be of equal value to a voter in Florida, New York, California or Arizona. 

Having said that.... there are "bigger fish to fry".  One example would be to use fiscal constraint, learn to spend what we have, not invent more taxes, cut back on unnecessary and redundant state departments.  Eliminate Efficiency Vermont, 90% of the surcharge on your light bill is paid in salaries not in energy efficient products.  Reduce the redundant non-for profit organizations and put them back on the tax payroll.

I could continue... but I am feeling in a good mood and do not want to ruin it for myself.

[petefitz]

Actually, with the popular vote all a candidate has to do is campaign in the most populous states and ignore the smaller ones.  Todd's math is right, oppose this deconstruction of the constitution! 

[msm]

Interesting Points by all involved ---  Let me provide some additional thoughts to ponder ..

2 Out of 100 ---- Equal representation --- Every state rerpresented by 2 -- Regardless of Population ---   The Senate provides an equal playing field
regardless of population.

Vermont has TWO -- Power Players -- Big Decision Makers who are truely enfluencial in our grand country ..   

One only think :  Vermont Jobs in Homeland Security &  Passport Services  ----

My point being this tiny state -- with a fractional populations -- has a TON of Power  -- a TON of POWER -

How do you think the 'Big States'  feel about this piece of the equation ? 

Someone stated earlier, our country founders,  were truely visionary folks,  235 years later and their system still works !  I for one consider their
bi-partisonship amazing .... and their brillance keeps shining.