Look to the parties

I think John DiPippa did a poor job of promoting his notion of getting rid of the Electoral College, stating it was obsolete and undemocratic and caused the Jan. 6 invasion of the U.S. Capitol. Somehow the Electoral College “allowed Trump and allies to advance absurd legal theories about the election.”

If Trump’s legal theories were absurd, the system was obviously successful in refuting them. That doesn’t keep lawsuits, frivolous or not, from occurring, as anyone can sue anyone for anything in this country. He finds the lawsuits “laughable” and “undemocratic,” but where is the connection to the Electoral College?

He is correct in stating that the

Electoral College “no longer filters the choice of a president through a small body of wise, disinterested persons.” That hasn’t happened because of the Electoral College, however, but because of the power of political parties growing to the extent they control the nominating process by deciding who the party chooses to run. The Electoral College delegates are sworn to the political party how they will vote and, except for two states, the presidential candidate will be the winner of that state’s presidential election. It would seem to me that the culprit in reducing our choices for president lies with political parties that have become too powerful and controlling in the nomination process, not the Electoral College.

DiPippa’s rant seems to me to be more about hate for Donald Trump and Republicans than about anything with the founding fathers’ Constitution. If we want to talk about changes, here are a couple to ponder: Term limits for senators and representatives, and a recall, no-confidence vote of the elected president as the English have for their prime minister. Seems to work for them.

FRAN CLARK

Searcy