A recent letter on eliminating the Electoral College was totally off the mark. (“High time for Electoral College to go,” Paul Baribault, Jan. 23).
The author refers to the “contrived genesis” of the Electoral College. It was hardly contrived, but a seriously debated issue, discussed off and on over the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, and was the second most contentious issue, after the consideration of representation of each state in Congress.
Representation by the states was the most contentious issue, with the small states rejecting a determination of representation by the proportion of the popular vote, which would have given the large states the overwhelming majority vote. Compromise led to the bicameral legislature and, with this in mind, the discussion followed of how to elect the president, and how much authority to grant the executive office.
The compromise that resulted in the Electoral College would give the small states some influence, importance, and consideration in presidential elections. If we went to the popular vote to elect the president, Maine — with a population of 1.3 million, and less than 1% of our total population — would likely be ignored by candidates but, as we have seen, its four electoral votes are enough to attract presidential candidates, giving us the opportunity for a closeup look at the candidates.
There was no mention of slavery, as asserted by the writer, in the detailed account of the Electoral College in the book “Decision in Philadelphia,” by Christopher and Lincoln Collier.
Robert Casimiro, Bridgton
Send questions/comments to the editors.
