Curtis Cole’s April 9 letter about the value of the Electoral College (“Electoral College provides equality for all states“) is misleading.
He points out that the current system was created to “protect our rural interests against urban domination.” True. He fails to point out that it also was created to give extra electoral power to the slave states.
Mr. Cole should be cautious invoking terms like “states’ rights” as a conservative principle. This is a dog whistle which has been used to justify both slavery and segregation.
The Electoral College system has a complicated history. The current “winner take all” system of assigning electoral votes in all states other than Maine and Nebraska is quite bizarre and was not anticipated by the founding fathers. No other modern democracy uses this odd, arcane system.
Contrary to the letter title “Electoral College provides equality,” the current system gives three times as much voting power to people in Washington D.C. and Wyoming compared to folks in Florida and California. Does this make sense?
I do not understand why Mr. Cole opposes the idea that the person with the most votes should win the presidency.
Frank Kieliszek, Norway
Copy the Story LinkSend questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.