CESF
Visiting Scholar Alexander S. Belenky
on
possible changes to the U.S. electoral
system
June
18, 2008
As
the 2008 presidential election draws
closer, questions of fairness arise
once again. Is the U.S. Electoral
College a good idea? Should we instead
choose our presidents based on the
popular vote?
On
June 17, 2008, Center for Engineering
Systems Fundamentals Visiting Scholar
Alexander S. Belenky addressed these
questions, and numerous others relating
to the U.S. electoral system, in a
lecture at the University of Manchester,
in the U.K.
Dr.
Belenky, who holds a Ph.D. in systems
analysis and applied mathematics,
is the author of several books about
U.S. elections: Extreme Outcomes
of US Presidential Elections
(2003), Winning the US Presidency:
Rules of the Game and Playing by the
Rules (2004), and How America
Chooses Its Presidents (2007).
Dr.
Belenky contends that, contrary to
popular belief, making the popular
vote a decisive factor in U.S. elections
would not necessitate the elimination
of the Electoral College.
He
told the audience in Manchester that
"slightly modified election rules
would let the country elect a U.S.
president with a mandate from both
the nation and the individual states,
and would make all the states 'battleground'
in election campaigns while keeping
the Electoral College as a backup.
These rules are likely to be supported
by enough states to amend the Constitution,
since all the states gain attention
of the candidates while keeping all
their Electoral College benefits."
According
to Dr. Belenky, modifying the rules
would mean greatly reducing the chances
that currently exist for the loser
of the popular vote to win the election
nevertheless—as was the case
in the 2000 election between George
W. Bush and Al Gore.
Dr.
Belenky also criticized media coverage
of the election process, particularly
its quantitative aspects. Media inaccuracies,
he said, have led to inaccurate perceptions
by the public regarding the nature
of the current system and the feasibility
of changing it.
|
