VIEWPOINT | Framers’ embrace of Electoral College not based on disdain for democracy

Column by David Adler

The Framers of the Constitution seriously considered adoption of a direct popular vote for the election of the president until objections exposed the likelihood that lack of communication, transportation and adequate knowledge of candidates would hobble the ability of Americans to make a reasoned and informed choice.

Some feared that voters would not be familiar with national leaders and would reflexively support candidates from their own states. Voter parochialism would undermine the prospects for national union. Although James Madison was an advocate for the popular vote, for its democratic nature, he observed that these challenges persuaded delegates to seek an alternative means of selecting the president, so long as it was grounded in the wishes of the voters.

Beresford parents accuse school district of discriminating against son who had behavior problems

It bears reminder that the Framers’ embrace of the Electoral College did not reflect, as some have suggested over the years, a disdain for democracy. George Mason of Virginia, one of three delegates to the Constitutional Convention who opposed the direct popular vote, is often cited for his opposition for direct election of the president: “It would be as unnatural to refer the choice of a proper character for the chief Magistrate to the people, as it would, to refer a trial of colours to a blind man.”

Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, another opponent, whose career after the Constitutional Convention included advocacy of manipulation of voting districts— “gerrymandering”—for which he has been wrapped in something approaching eternal censure, held a mixed view of the wisdom of the people. After losing an election, he denounced voters for their lack of knowledge. Later, after he won an election, he declared the immense wisdom of the electorate.

VIEWPOINT | The real relationship between Trump-style tariffs and economic growth