In Defense of
the Electoral College, Part 1: A Check on Socialism
by Steve Farrell
Because of all the brouhaha over the Electoral College that occurred
in the year 2000, when a President of the United States was elected
despite the fact that he lost the popular vote, there has been a
growing chorus calling for an abandonment of the electoral college
in favor of a more direct democracy, one which features one person,
one vote.
One person,
one vote, majority rule sounds American, progressive, and fair,
but here’s a reminder, it failed in Greece, it brought down
Rome, and it almost crushed America under the Articles of Confederation.
Edmund Randolf,
one of the distinguished delegates from Virginia, stated at the
Constitutional Convention: "The general object [to which we’ve
gathered together in this convention is] to provide a cure for the
evils under which the United States labored; that in tracing these
evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence
and follies of democracy."
Eldridge Gerry,
the delegate from Massachusetts, knew well what one of those turbulent
follies was. He warned of democracy: "[I have] been taught
by experience the danger of the leveling spirit ... possessed in
it." That is, its tendency toward what we call communism and
socialism.
Madison, the
very Father of the Constitution, taught the same exact thing. In
Federalist 10 he warned every American that among democracy’s
many dangers was this chief one: "A common passion or interest
will, in almost every case ... [combine to destroy] ... personal
security or the rights of property ... [and insist on] ... reducing
mankind to a perfect equality ... in their possessions, their opinions,
and their passions."
Marx, of course,
told us that the chief object of communism was the destruction of
the right to private property. Understanding the danger inherent
in pure democracies, Communists preach democracy, everywhere they
go, with an emphasis on equality of ends, rather than Jefferson’s
republican principle of equality before the law. Writes Marx in
the Communist Manifesto, "We have seen ... that the first step
in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat
[the poor, or "working class"] to the position of ruling
class, to win the battle of democracy."
That is, use
democracy to concentrate all power in the hands of a minority, or
a group of minorities in order to overthrow the existing political,
economic, and moral order.
The cure to
such dangers agreed upon at the Constitutional Convention, was the
establishment of a republic with mixed modes of representation,
checks and balances, separations of power, and a bill of rights.
The magnificence
of the system is that it established a system which made it extremely
difficult for power to combine, whether in the hands of the one
(monarchy), the few (oligarchy), or the many (democracy).
The people already
had a voice in the House, which was checked by a Senate elected
by the state legislatures (a check devised to protect property and
state rights). They did not want to then obliterate that check by
having the president directly elected by the people, that is, dependent
upon a majority victory only.
Thus, they insured
that the president would be indirectly elected through electors
(who were picked by whatever mode the states saw fit to establish),
and then they set up a representative formula, identical to the
one in Congress, which insured a successful candidate must seek
broad support rather than big city support only.
That is why
each state has a guaranteed three electoral votes, regardless of
the size of the state, as a check against the second part of the
formula, which focused on population.
This was an
inspired move. Big cities, which are the stuff of big states, while
they traditionally attract wealth, are also centers of poverty,
being places where the vast majority of new immigrants trying to
find their way, and old welfare recipients who never seem to find
their way, are found in their largest numbers.
To then create
an election formula that depends upon the popular vote alone creates
candidates who will tend to focus inordinately upon the poor and
uneducated to get elected. This is a prescription for socialism
and communism.
The Electoral
College helps prevent this. It insures a candidate must balance
his approach with rural, property, and state rights issues. It is
one of many checks against direct democracy found in our Constitution,
and is therefore a check against socialism. It ought to be left
alone.
Look for Part
2: "Protecting Minority Rights," here at Meridian Magazine
Click
here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.
© 2002 Meridian
Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
|
