Dear Editor,
I read with interest the article in the Sept. 4, 2019 Paper regarding the League of Women Voters stance on the popular vote versus the Electoral College in National Elections. As I understand it, the LWV contends that an election for President should be determined by popular vote through the National Popular Vote Plan. The National Popular Vote Plan is an agreement among the states to guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in ALL 50 states and District of Columbia.
The LWV goes on to state that the current system causes 35 states and VOTERS to be ignored in non-competitive states. In 2008, 98% of all $ was spent in just 15 battleground states. I don’t see how this would differ with the National Popular Vote Plan that they endorse. As a matter of fact, the number of voters in 12 states would total 56.54% of the total vote. If I were a national candidate, I would only have to get those votes to win the presidency. Since Indiana makes up only 2.02% of the National voting public why would I do any campaigning in Indiana.
Comparing the issue to statewide or local elections makes no sense. The LWV states “direct election works well for members of Congress, governors, state legislators, mayors, city councilmen, school boards, etc. Why should it not work for President and Vice President?” Well, when I am voting for mayor, governor, or state legislators I don’t have to worry about someone in New York or California voting and mandating the winner of the local election.
Maybe the Electoral College is not the answer but when I see that the four most populous states comprising 33.29% of the nation’s popular vote have voted for the winner of the election between 73% and 85% of the time I don’t want to leave the control up to those states. Is there another way to make mine and your vote count?
Gary Behling