Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

What's wrong with the constitution?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
The main change I would make is to nullify the Electoral College. Other than that, the U.S. Constitution, with its system of checks and balances of 3 separate branches of government is pretty good. The parliamentary system has some advantages, such as more democratic proportional representation, but also some problems. The founders themselves didn't think the Constitution was perfect. They designed this document to be modify-able. Amendments have been added over the years; In 1865 the 13th Amendment was added which outlawed slavery. In 1920, the 19th Amendment was added which gave women the vote.

There is one feature of the Constitution that has never been used: If 2/3 of the states so vote, Congress must hold a Constitutional Convention, to modify the Constitution. So far, that has never happened.
helenS · 36-40, F
@badminton "its system of checks and balances of 3 separate branches of government is pretty good.
— I believe it's the core of the constitution, and it's [u]very[/u] powerful.
Carissimi · 70-79, F
The Electoral College prevents a few larger states dominating the smaller ones. If California and New York dictates who would be president, not only does it disenfranchise other states, but God help us. @badminton
helenS · 36-40, F
@Carissimi It's equality of states vs. equality of people. That's the big question.
Carissimi · 70-79, F
No, it’s not people vs. states. It’s the people in large states vs. the people in smaller states. Imagine if London and Birmingham decided ALL elections in England, and the people in the rest of the country had no power of their vote. This is the fairest way. @helenS
helenS · 36-40, F
@Carissimi I think I really get your point. My point is: one man, one vote (You know what I mean when I say "man").
Carissimi · 70-79, F
I agree, but in a huge country like the states, the larger states would dictate every single election. Now, if the largest states were held by Republican voters, do you think the Left would want to do away with the EC? Of course not. They’d cry “foul,” that their smaller states had no voice. The Left want change willy nilly to suit whatever works for them in any moment. @helenS
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
@helenS Americans move freely between the states all the time. Citizens are not somehow attached to any one state. I've lived in four states myself. Voting should be one person - one vote, that's what democracy means in every country that calls itself a democracy. All states should opt to give all their EC votes to the winner of the popular vote.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@badminton Another democrat that has never read the reasoning behind the college, I see
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
@sunsporter1649 I maintain that the framers erred with the electoral College. In elections each vote should be counted. With the EC, the electors are appointed by the political parties in each state.

Also, it is wishful thinking to assume the electors would be totally objective and unswayed by their own politics, or they could be bribed or otherwise influenced. We should live up to our claims of being a free country and a democracy and put the EC in the past where it belongs.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@badminton Elections are much to important to be left to the voters