Michael wrote:The purpose of having sovereign states making up the USA was to resist greater and greater centralization of power away from people and this still makes sense to some of us. See the 10th amendment. I wouldn't mind getting rid of the electoral college. Keep it simple: one person, one vote, equal across the country.
Supreme Court jurispdrudence, among other things, has deprived the 10th Amendment of the "plain meaning" that its words would suggest. The Tenth Amendment reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." WIthout getting into a longwinded analysis, I think it's safe to say that the federal government today exercises power beyond the language of the Tenth Amendment and more control over the individual states and citizens than the Founders envisioned -- or, at the very least, those Founders who were highly suspicious of concentrated federal power (like Jefferson and Richard Henry Lee).
And if we get rid of the Electoral College, we might as well get rid of the primary system as well. Instead of a state-by-state approach, which gives greater power to states that go early in framing the race, etc., there should be one national primary on a single day, so that all Republicans and all Democrats can have an equal voice in choosing their party's candidate, right? (Although by doing so we'd lose that part of each party's primary where the state delegation gives their goofy speeches when casting their votes; and Iowa would be stuck with all that extra corn.)
In any event, I believe that the concept of 50 strong states, with meaningful powers reserved to them, is an important feature of this country. It's even in our name. But it's undeniable that we're trending to a nation run out of one city. And despite all the rhetoric on both sides in this election, that's not going to change.