“They know who won the most votes, so why do they not know who the next president is?” This is the question being asking around the world today. How can the “greatest democracy in the world” not determine their leader by who won the most votes? Well, after a quick Google search, many of those asking this question will learn about the electoral college and how it is possible for the person who wins the most votes to not win the presidency.
So, as we await the results of the current presidential election and the balance of power in the Senate, let’s consider some desperately needed electoral reforms.
Eliminate the Electoral College.
As made famous by Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, America is a nation “of the people, by the people and, for the people.” In America, the person who wins the most votes should win every election. Not just Senate elections and House elections, but Presidential elections as well. America’s government is not “of the people” if the person the people choose to lead their government is not elected president.
Mail Everyone a Ballot.
According to the Constitution, voting is a right and a privilege. Rights are entitlements which constitute an obligation on the part of the government to its citizens. Therefore, citizens should NOT have to wait hours in line to vote. Furthermore, citizens should not have to fear contracting a deadly disease to vote. The federal government has an obligation to make sure that all those who can lawfully vote and want to, can and do so safely. The easiest way to do this, is to mail ever eligible voter a ballot.
Despite President Trump claiming that the expansion of mail-in ballots will lead to voter fraud, there little to no evidence of this. Even before the current pandemic, five states – Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington – conducted all-mail elections and every state provided some form of absentee voting.
Extend House Terms to Four Years.
Article I, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states that the House of Representatives should be reconstituted ever two years with its members elected by the people. The problem with a two-year term is that members of congress spend all their time running for reelection and not enough time governing and thinking about what is in the long-term interest of America.
Members of the House notoriously spend an inordinate amount of time on cable news and social media attacking their political opponents in order to raise funds to run for reelection.
In order to promote collegiality and bipartisanship, members of the House should face reelection every four years. A lengthened term will force legislators to spend more time in the present and less time on positioning themselves for the next election.
While no constitutional amendment has passed since the 27th Amendment was ratified in 1992, lengthening the term of members of congress would undoubtedly encourage members to focus less time on campaigning and more on what they are paid to do – legislating.
Comments