Jeff,
What does it mean that they "didn't care about fairness" in the context of states? States like Delaware, Rhode Island and New Hampshire had to ratify the Constitution. Each state wanted to join the Union under conditions which were most advantageous to it. The ratifiers were the states themselves.
If it were true that the electoral college were created because of "logistics" then each state could just send one elector. Instead, each state sends:
1. a number electors in proportion to its population (number of congressmen)
PLUS
2. two additional electors (number of senators)
In this way, large states like Virginia could be represented by their number of congressmen and small states like New Hampshire would have a minimum number of electors in fairness to the fact that it was an individual state with its own laws and treasury. A nice compromise.
But in fairness there are is usually more than one answer. These seem to be the initial arguments and goals for the electoral system and its process:
1. Addressing the concerns of both small and large states in order to get full ratification (see above, this was a compromise made at constitutional convention)
2. Normal citizens not having familiarity with candidates (can't trust uneducated people) (Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper 68) (Is that "logistics"?)
3. Best way to get George Washington elected president
|