JOPLIN, Mo. — I write in opposition to the Forum article in Sunday’s Globe (April 15) based on a presentation by a “local expert.” I am local, but not an expert; just an ordinary citizen of Joplin. The issue is how we might change the manner in which we elect our president and vice president in America.

There is one statement in the article, a quote from the “local expert,” with which I agree. “The Founders did not trust we the people.” Anyone studying Civics 101 in high school knows that. It was never the intent of the Founding Fathers to create a pure democracy. Rather, their intent was to create a constitutional republic — a big difference.

It has worked well for some 235 years — the best form of government yet devised by humans, in my view. For sure, I would not change it on a whim. The only correct way to change how we elect national leaders should be through a long and thorough national debate to change the Constitution, in my view.

The fundamental dilemma facing the Founders was their distrust of a powerful national government. They clearly recognized the need for a national government, but attempted to limit the power of such a government. They deeply believed that the states should hold the bulk of governmental power.

One might ask, why would they choose to do that? Maybe the word “diversity” comes to mind. The Founders did not want a one-size-fits-all government. They recognized broad diversity in ideas over how to govern among the original 13 states, and they wrote a document to allow that diversity to prevail to the greatest extent possible.

Put another way: I believe the Founders did not want to homogenize American government. I’m not even sure if that word was in the dictionary in 1787, but I suspect that is part of the original intent of our Founders. I also understand quite clearly that the Founders, collectively, did not want a few large states to dominate the remaining smaller states.

For 235 or so years, the electors from each state have elected our president and vice president. How electors were directed to vote has varied over those centuries, but electors have ultimately determined the winner of a presidential and vice presidential campaign 56 times.

I give credit to the local expert for doing the research informing us that five times in those 56 elections something was amiss in the vote of the electors. But I challenge his assessment that “every time the Electoral College screws up we go to hell in a hand basket.” Such is a partisan political judgment, in my view, shaped over the dispute in the 2000 election.

And of course the local expert defines himself as a “Democratic Party loyalist.” If in fact that is what he is, a “party loyalist,” then why should we expect his views to be non-partisan? Local progressives may well laugh when I claim not to be a party loyalist. I consider myself to be an independent conservative instead. I could care less which political party gains power nationally. Instead, I only care about how that party governs, be it the Democratic Party or the GOP, or whatever other party may rule.

However as a conservative, I always look to the Constitution to guide my opinions on government. If political factions over the years want change — real change — that is fine with me. But they should change the Constitution to put such changes into effect.

Consider this hypothetical example of a “bad” election. Suppose we only elected a president based on the national popular vote.  All it would take would be a strong popular majority in 10 or 15 big states to determine that election, leaving some 35 or 40 states with no say in the matter.

No thanks, for this conservative. I don’t want California and New York determining how I live in Missouri. Regional diversity should still play a role in national politics, unless we the people decide to change the Constitution to make it otherwise.

Changing the Constitution is one thing. But tinkering with the Constitution to try to skirt the issue is a whole different way to govern. As a conservative, I say no to such attempts.



Anson Burlingame lives in Joplin.