Civics lesson for Sal
Speaker Sal DiMasi is wrong for endorsing the National Popular Vote initiative (“Salvatore DiMasi backs abolishing Electoral College process in favor of national vote,” July 1).
The Founders instituted the Electoral College for several reasons. Many argue that a switch to a popular vote system would enfranchise more voters; in fact it would disproportionately give more power to the larger states and metropolitan areas, leaving small states with little or no influence. Candidates would concentrate on densely populated areas where their resources could be more efficiently spent to reach voters. Voters in lesser populated areas would be ignored.
Furthermore, the National Popular Vote movement assumes the traditional, two-party system will hold. This will not be the case. We would see many elections like 1860, where the winning candidate only received 40 percent of the vote. A national popular vote system would encourage regional and issue-specific candidates, making it rare that one candidate would win a majority. A major candidate could only concentrate on his regions of strength and ignore the other parts of the country.
The Founders developed a system that has worked well for 218 years. Why change it now?
John Macek III
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Civics Lesson for Sal
The Boston Herald published my letter concerning Speaker Salvatore DiMasi's support for the "National Popular Vote" initiative.