In a recent column, Lloyd Omdahl presents a confused examination of the Electoral College (" Archaic Electoral College still elects presidents ," Page A4, Nov. 28). He probably brought some readers to total frustration on the issue, while at the same time admitting that U.S House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi may not know what the heck she's thinking.
Conversely, the Herald also printed an excellent letter by Duane Mutch, a North Dakota elector in this Electoral College, in which Mutch expertly defines the Electoral College's creation and existence (" North Dakota elector: Electoral College is 'excellent ," Page A4, Nov. 30).
Mutch refers to the founders foreseeing the "tumult and disorder" of a national meeting on the issue of a presidential election. To the founders who opposed a direct rule by popular vote, we owe a great debt. They foresaw a republic as the way to go, because emotion and self-interest typify direct democracy, while objectivity and total interest are the results in a republic.
The Electoral College is a big part of why we are a republic and not a direct democracy.
While Omdahl may pine for the return to the progressive thought that brought about direct election of senators and other "more democratic" movements, we are indeed fortunate that the rule of our Constitution remains, and that the Electoral College provides a bit of security for those of us who don't live on our nation's heavily populated coasts.
ADVERTISEMENT
For those Herald readers who skedaddled after the election and may be reading this from their new Canadian homes, they should know that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was not elected by popular vote.
In the words of a typical Larimore (N.D.) Pioneer headline from more than a half-century ago, "Kempton [Mutch's hometown] conquers Conway [Omdahl's hometown] in decisive battle".
Jerry Gullikson
Gilby, N.D.
