[OFB Cafe] Electoral College (was Re: Bio Fuels)

[Derek Broughton]

On July 22, 2008 18:15:59 Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Timothy Butler <tbutler at ofb.biz> [07-22-08 16:26]:
> > 	I admit there is the possibility of problems, but I'm not sure
> > a straight popular vote would really accomplish a whole lot in the
> > scheme of things. In fact, it would mostly yield more power to a few
> > concentrated areas (like New York City) which have a much denser
> > population.
>
> The *real* problem with the electoral college is that they are not
> bound to vote for a particular individual.

Aren't they?  I am an alien, but aiui, that's entirely dependent on the rules 
of the particular state's electoral college.  iirc, at least one state sends 
representatives to the EC proportionally, and at least one appoints them from 
the state assembly and isn't even bound by the results of the state vote.

This, of course, is entirely Tim's point - that as a federal republic, it's 
not any of the federal government's business how the electoral college is 
manned.  Now, as a citizen of a non-federal non-republic, that's a 
little "quaint" to me, but as one of my personal peeves is with _our_ lack of 
representative government I sure can't say it's worse than what we've got.

I've heard Americans say that it's undemocratic to have more than two 
candidates for an office.  I don't know if that's a common belief, but it 
both makes my skin crawl - and I see where they're coming from.  In our 
system of "first past the post" ensures that if we have 5 candidates for a 
post, the winner rarely needs more than 30% of the vote.  At least you guys 
get a clear winner almost every time.
-- 
derek