>My beef is with the whole system of Electoral College. The vote should be simple popular majority. Why does my vote in Florida count for more than somebody's vote in Alaska? It shouldn't! One citizen, one vote. That should be it.

Actually, your vote in Florida counts LESS than one in Alaska.

I don't know the actual numbers, so I'll make them up.

Assume that each congressional district is 100,000 people. Florida's 25 electoral votes represent 2,300,000 people (23 congressional districts and 2 senators). Alaska's 3 electoral votes represent 100,000 people. I'm not very good at the math involved, but consider your vote as being split into a portion devoted to the congressional component and senetorial components of the electoral vote. For the congressional component, your vote is equal to that of a voter in Alaska. For the senetorial component you are 1/2300000 of the two senetorial electors, but an Alaskan is 1/100000 of his/her senetorial component.


The Electoral College was a brilliant compromise between those who wanted one state/one vote and those who wanted one man/one vote (and I realize that should read One White Property Owning Male).

The idea was to protect the small states from domination by the larger ones.
This was carried out to a much larger extent by splitting congress into two houses - one based upon population and one giving equal representation to each state.

If the concept is still valid (especially given the increased powers of the executive since the founding of the republic), then the Electoral College is worth maintaining.