Say CHEESE!

As to the electoral college, for the sake of the less populated states, I think we have to keep it. I have an extended post on my blog, written last summer, if you want to read it.

LP

The electoral college elects the President who has a different role and set of responsibilities than our Senators elected by each state. There might be an answer there as to how we could find good reason to lobby in both directions.

Since I would defend the electoral college and fight against electing Senators by state legislatures, my arguments in each instance might be opposed to one another too!

Hmmmm…

Sometimes a proposed solution really is too simple. File this in the category of the pendulum swinging to and fro or in the “been there, done that” file.

The history of electing Senators by state legislatures is one of deadlock with seats remaining empty for long periods, bribery to buy the seats, and intimidation to get someone to drop the fight. No doubt, some periods of our history are marked by more closed door dealings than others but I can’t imagine this system faring any better today. We really haven’t come as far as we think we have.

I’ve worked within one of the parties enough to know everyone who thinks they’re “in the know” demonstrates what they know by making grand statements about candidates who have paid their dues–measured in contributions to local, state, and national party organizations as well as to favored party candidates. Grand statements are made about voting records and little escapes without being trivialized. There is no way I believe my state legislature would wade through all of that and arrive at a better decision than I would. I can even name a couple dozen other people I’d trust more. I can imagine comparing the state legislature’s outcome to my sister’s vote and still liking her choice better. She’ll probably vote for whomever looks the best…if I can convince her to vote. She still has a 50/50 shot at it.

So, let me play the populist here. It’s fairly easy since I really am puzzled at how easy some of us would let election by popular vote go. I trust the people and their result however they come to their conclusion more than I trust previously elected officials jockeying for position within the party or for the next office they’ll seek.

While I’d like there to be widespread participation in elections, I think it’s perfectly rational to choose to not participate. If that leaves the ultimate outcome to a few quasi-rational people, that’s a system that works well enough for me.

The question for me becomes “How do you get people to care?” I can assign my government students any number of tasks–checking a senator’s voting records on any given issue is a perennial–but I don’t know how to encourage them to care, if they’re not so inclined anyway, unless I can help them see how it DOES affect their lives.

In my case, Will’s boxes provide a framework for helping others to see both the big picture and their little corner of it. The more I toss the model around in my mind the more clearly I see it, and the more readily I can pass it on. It is helping me to develop a vision beyond my own station in life.

It also helps to have traveled regularly since childhood: to see other places, meet other people, explore other ideas; unfortunately in a high-poverty rural area, most of my students have not had that opportunity. So all my travels become professional development–stuff to share with my kids! Montpelier will be a great segue into both government and history (including biography, culture, archaeology…), and a trip to the beach becomes a science lesson (wetlands ecology).

Will all this cure rational ignorance? No, but awareness is a step in the right direction: if we KNOW we’re ignorant, maybe we’ll get curious.