Customer Reviews

Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Like many of my peers, I have never really understood why the Electoral College was used in the U.S. (as opposed to direct voting). The breadth of my knowledge in this area came from my schooling, and now I realize that this part of my education was left sadly unattended. Thankfully, books like this exist to fill in what the education system left out.

The Electoral College was a thoroughly researched system of checks and balances worked into the fabric of the U.S. voting system. In her study of the electoral system, Ms. Ross does an excellent job of explaining the thought processes that went behind this invention of our founding fathers. She also delves into the anomalies of such contentious elections as the 1888 and 2000 campaigns, giving thought provoking reasons as to why these elections demonstrate the success of the electoral college, rather than the demise of an anachronistic electoral machine.

"Enlighened Democracy" is a great choice for anyone who left the 2000 election worrying that our voting system is antiquated or problem - riddled. Ms. Ross deliberately explains the founding fathers' plan and shows how that plan has succeeded in its intentions time and again.

For years now history teachers and professors have been spreading the myth that the Electoral College was created as a buffer against democratic control, a way of taking the choice of our chief executive out of the hands of the common man and giving it to an enlightened few. Tara Ross's book debunks that myth and shows that the Electoral College was instead viewed by the Founders as a compromise between large and small states that would strengthen democratic rule while protecting minorities.

In addition to tracing the Electoral College's history and making the case that it is a valuable institution for modern America, Ross also does a good job of showing how the system has served over time. She makes the point that it forces candidates to run national (as opposed to regional) campaigns and that it has helped many a candidate with a small popular vote majority gain enough legitimacy to govern effectively (as it did for Bill Clinton in 1992).

All in all this is a fascinating book on an often misunderstood topic. From the introduction by George Will to the discussion of the Constitutional Convention, Enlightened Democracy is readable, enjoyable, and long overdue.

We live in a large country; both geographically and in population. There is always the temptation to either extrapolate from where we live that we are the same as everyone else and also a temptation to think that everyone out there is like us. Neither is sound.

We are all Americans, it is true. But some live in cities, some have agrarian lives. There are big states and small states (again, large in size and population). Some are industrial; others are centers of banking and others of politics. Some rely on a strong presence by the military for economic survival. There are many other configurations. For too many, the few TV shows we watch become the common reality and we assume that if it makes sense to a talking head on the tube it must make sense in the real world. It does not! The perfect example is the famed movie critic Pauline Kael's reaction when McGovern was destroyed by Nixon in the 1972 Presidential election. She asked a friend, "How can this be? No one I know voted for Nixon." All of us live in a truncated subset of the real world.

The founders understood this and believed that the proper role for government was to have the work done as close to the people as possible and the various States then had much more power than they do today. Maybe there is a good reason for this change of power from the states to Washington D.C., maybe not. However, the Federal government is still a creature representing a vast array of lives. One of the strengths of our system is its ability to require compromise and to thwart rashness. Almost no one gets what he or she wants or believes is best.

One of the wonderful inventions of the founders was the use of the Electoral College in choosing our Chief Executive. Remember, Tony Blair or whomever is the PM of the United Kingdom is not directly elected by the people at all. He is elected by the other MPs.

This wonderful book provides a solid explanation of what the Electoral College process does for our political process. The author, Tara Ross, is correct in pointing out that a shift to a direct popular vote of the people would create unforeseen changes in the way elections are contested and there is no way to anticipate how much change there would actually be. She points out how well our system keeps problems to manageable sizes within states. If we had to have a nationwide recount of an election such as Bush/Gore 2000, it would be a technical and administrative nightmare.

The book also discusses alternatives processes that have been proposed, takes us through contested past elections, and landslides to show us how the process has actually functioned for 200 years rather than the theory spouted on the chat shows. There is even a table at the end of every election showing the candidates, the popular vote, and the electoral vote. The book also discusses the faithless elector problem, the proposal for automatic electors, and some strange gaps in our process if a candidate should be elected but should die after the electors cast their votes, but before they are read by Congress.

I believe that the Electoral College is a strength to our Country. It forces the candidates to build broad coalitions and pay attention to states where they are not overwhelmingly strong. Listening to those folks has to be a help to someone whose job it is to be the Chief Executive for ALL the people.

I recommend this book very strongly for EVERY voter who has anything less than a solid grasp on the history and benefits of the Electoral College in the electing of our Presidents.

In this heavily researched and well footnoted book author Ross begins by laying out the rationale for and history of the Electoral College. But she goes well beyond an historical narrative as she gives the arguments for and against changing or abolishing alltogether the College.

You come away from this book with a clear understanding of the importance of the Electoral College and the ways in which it protects our political systems.

A close reading of this book leaves the reader with insights into the Founders' goals and reasoning and immense appreciation of their genius in creating a form of government that has survived and met the needs of its citizens for over 200 years.

Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College is a solid primer for those who are either simply unfamiliar with the Electoral College and Election Process as a whole, or for those who would like to know more about our nation's great, democratic structure. Ross tackles the widely debated issue of the Electoral College by first providing a detailed background on our Founding Fathers and their decision to form such a process and then moving on to not only explain the Electoral College thoroughly but also to list its numerous advantages and past successes in helping our nation select a Commander-in-Chief.

I read this book after reading "Under God: George Washington and the Question of Church and State"- a marvelous book she co-authored with Joseph C. Smith. Yet again, I was not disappointed. Ms. Ross excels in thoroughly researching her topic, comparing the alternative positions, and explaining/supporting her personal conclusions. Although I am aware that my politics and opinions closely resemble Ms. Ross'- this book is by no means a partisan effort. Ms. Ross readily acknowledges the stronger points offered by the Electoral College opponents. However, instead of merely ridiculing the opposition's arguments, Ms. Ross offers an intelligent explanation as to why the knee-jerk condemnation of the Electoral College system in the post-Bush/Gore era is misplaced. Further, although Ms. Ross artfully explains the continuing relevance of the Electoral College system, she does concede that minor adjustments may be warranted (i.e. scrapping the "faithless elector" balloting mechanism for an automatic system).

All in all, a very well written historical, yet topical book. I look forward to her future endeavors...either solo, or with Mr. Smith.

A timely, thoughtful, concise & well-reasoned analysis of the Electoral College. Definitely recommended for anyone with even a passing interest in our constitutional system both from a practical and historical perspective.

I am in fact quite familiar with early American history, and the author covers it reasonably well. Yes, she cherry-picks facts a bit, uses evidence a tad selectively, and clearly is thesis-driven. But it is not an ignorant book. Just slightly wrong-headed in my view. In fact, the issue has been divisive for a very long time---since the founding almost---in which an elite body wanted to be somewhat democratic but feared, respectfully, the bulky lower masses. James Madison, when discussing what to write into the Constitution, said even if every Athens citizen of antiquity had been the equivalent of a Socrates, it would still mean Athens was governed by a mob. So yes indeed, they wanted certain buffers from the popular will. As we matured as a nation we dispensed with property requirements for voting, and then did away with state legislatures choosing our senators a century ago. And it is now time to accept popular election of presidents in the same way. We can handle it.
But this is a cogent presentation of the other view, although the fact an arch-elitist like George Will wrote the introduction might indicate her political predispositions as well.