Election reform

There are serious problems with our election system, and I would like to see election reform. Most reform proposals rely on a switch to a popular vote. Personally, I'm far more concerned with the political duopoly of Democrats and Republicans.


I have already written about my issues with the popular vote. Since then, my concerns have only become stronger. For this reason, I have decided to revisit this concept.

Let me start with something basic. In a sense, the popular vote is a myth. The people do not vote for president. They vote for electors. Sure, the name of the presidential candidate bound to electors shows up on ballots, but that's not who they're electing.

States have flexibility to determine how electors are selected. In order for the popular vote to work, you have to establish that voting is uniform. What if a state wanted a more direct vote of electors? What if they wanted to try instant runoff voting? These can create an inconsistency in voting that harm the integrity of the popular vote. In order for a popular vote to work, you have to hinder state rights.

There have been some constitutional questions raised. To me, the issue of constitutionality is a given. The purpose of current efforts to switch to a popular vote is clearly an attempt to circumvent the system established in the Constitution. The only way we can legally change the election system is to amend the Constitution.

One consideration of the Constitution was to keep larger states from pushing around smaller states. This is why electoral votes are not directly proportional to the population. The efforts currently being made to switch to a popular vote not only change the balance of power towards the larger states, they also allow larger states to manipulate the approach to voting in the smaller states. Again, the popular vote doesn't work if states find their own ways of electing electors. This is another way in which the popular vote undermines the Constitution.

Most of what I have written is just repeating what I have stated in the past. There's one concern that has emerged in recent years that has not been given the attention that it needs. The states pushing the hardest to circumvent the system outlined in the Constitution are liberal states. Many of these same states pushed legislation to remove Trump from ballots unless he released his taxes.

These laws were always going to face serious legal challenges. Because the Constitution allows states control over the process of selecting electors, I do not believe that these laws should be considered unconstitutional. Despite that, it should be considered highly unethical. Anyone who voted for such a measure needs to be voted out of office. A party in a position of power should never be given the flexibility to simply remove competition from the ballot.

What these liberal states have been trying to do fits their own definition of voter suppression. By removing Trump from the ballot, they could discourage Republicans from voting. More importantly, these policies are clear attempts to manipulate the popular vote.

I can't support states colluding to illegally undermine our election system. I also can't support a party in a position of power unethically removing competition from the ballot. On their own, these are both bad ideas. Together, they are far worse. The states that are pushing for a switch to a popular vote are already looking for ways to manipulate the popular vote.