You say that all the campaigning is focused on the swing states, but as an individual who lives in such a swing state, I assure you that, doing away with the EC would result in a number of those states getting ignored completely. Hell, just a couple weeks ago we had a "in-land hurricane" rip thru Iowa, devastating the city of Cedar Rapids (which is still trying to recover from) and wiping out 1/3 of the state's corn crop, and NOBODY knew about it outside the area until a week later!!! You think the campaigns will care about "fly-over country" without the EC? They won't.
There is only one major reform I see that is truly needed, and that is switching to a preferential/tiered ballot, where you may vote for up to, let's say three candidates, ranking them as to your order of preference (where if your top choice fails to garner enough votes, your second choice is counted instead, and then third if second also isn't a contender), thus allowing third parties and independents an actual viability, and breaking up the dual-sided monopoly of party politics.
Political parties have a shelf-life of roughly two generations/50 years, before they need replacing. The Dems and Reps are Civil War-era parties, while there aren't many 19th Century issues still needing addressing here in the 21st Century. That is why neither modern day party has much in common with their 19th Century counterparts -- the parties change to maintain their power over the system, rather than the voters cycling in new ideas from time to time on their own. Both parties are 100 years overdue for being replaced (and their replacements' replacements' replacements should be the ones in power today).
As you said yourself, doing away with the EC wouldn't change the system in any noticeable way, and to require such huge changes to the Constitution in order to remove it would be a complete waste of time, for so little return.
|