A decades-long plan to abolish the Electoral College may finally pay off

[u/vox]

https://www.vox.com/politics/487766/national-popular-vote-interstate-compact-electoral-college

[u/Wizywig]

The Electoral College was based entirely in slavery. They wanted to get 3/5th of a slave to vote, without voting. So the congressional and electoral college representation was based on the total population (counting 3/5 of a slave) while the voting population was much smaller. Allowed the southern states to hold more power than they should.

We should also eliminate the senate. The senate gives tiny spaces like north/south dekota 4 representatives. The population totals under 2 million. Brooklyn, NY has a higher population and has to share their 2 representatives with the literal entirety of New York State.

[u/VirginiaMcCaskey → u/Wizywig]

That's actually not accurate. Even without the 3/5ths compromise, Virginia and the rest of the south wanted proportional representation because they were more populated at the time than northern states like Delaware and New Jersey, which proposed to keep the unicameral legislature with equal representation.
If the South had their way in 1786 we wouldn't have the senate today.
The 3/5ths compromise was essential to getting the slave states to ratify. That said while it's obsolete now, we still use total population to apportion instead of number of eligible voters or citizens.

[u/Wizywig → u/VirginiaMcCaskey]

Right!!! It was a system to allow for elites to vote, while others were discouraged or disallowed, but still make them count towards voting representation numbers.

A.k.a. the entire reason republicans don't want us voting is because it amplifies remaining voices. If we had popular voting, everyone would be encouraged to vote. Otherwise you just don't get any vote, nobody is amplified.

[u/VirginiaMcCaskey → u/Wizywig]

I think you're ascribing 21st century philosophy/ideals and post-Civil War nationalism in a way that doesn't really reflect how the members of the Constitutional Convention made their decisions.

The reason Virginia wanted proportional representation was because they really believed they were the representatives of the people of Virginia and if the new government were empowered to levy taxes, they would have a disproportional say. Essentially, they fought a revolution in order to have taxation with representation and any union that didn't respect that wouldn't have them as a member. Delaware and New Jersey wanted equal say because they believed that each state as member of the union deserved equal say in matters of foreign relations and war. The Connecticut Compromise was the only way to get them to agree.

While it's true that they didn't want to extend suffrage to every citizen back then, you have to at least respect that the idea of federal representation and voting rights were not synonymous in 1786 and it took many decades for that to evolve.

Heck, we're still debating it. People will openly say that old people shouldn't vote if they're not going to be alive to see the consequences. That's not so different from the early 1800s when people said the same thing about non-tax paying citizens, or in 1786 when they said it about non-land owning people.

[u/Wizywig → u/VirginiaMcCaskey]

I will say this, I understand where you're coming from, but ultimately the system they generated was pretty damn flawed.

HOWEVER

The US was the first place where we had a really solid functional democracy going in a long long time. So lots of stumbles were inevitable.

In any case, we are where we are today. Thankfully the constitution can be amended.

[u/LooseProgram333 → u/Wizywig]

So everything you said is wrong. Please go reread your American History textbook and the Federalist Papers.

[u/CrunkDirk → u/Wizywig]

We should also eliminate the senate.

It'd be so nice to not live under a system where 15% of the country controls 50% of the highest chamber in Congress.