Levinson begins his argument of proving the constitution is flawed by addressing what he believes is problematic about the electoral college. According to Levinson, the electoral system is outdated in our new millennium. The evidence he uses to support the argument against the electoral system is that it prevents the popular vote from prevailing and gives advantage to less populated states. This occurs since each state is guaranteed at least three electoral votes and these votes determine the presidency of our country. A specific, argument-supporting example by Levinson explains that three rural states such as the Dakotas and Wyoming attain more electoral votes compared to New Mexico, which has a similar population. This example provides solid evidence that the constitution has overlooked the popular vote. Besides the electoral college, Levinson believes a number of other constitutional flaws exist.
The most unreliable feature of the constitution according to Levinson is the power of the House of Representatives on a one-state, one-vote basis to decide a stalemate between the electoral college. This would ultimately …show more content…
There is a good reason that throughout history there has only been one constitutional convention. The first and most important issue that would most likely arise in the face of a convention is the Electoral College. After the 2016 election, the Electoral College proved once again that it was able to overturn the popular vote. The more populated cities and states and therefore, most of the United States, would likely support modifying the Electoral College. In contrast, smaller states would oppose of this ratification due to diminishing their power. The results of this would either be a more representative amount of electors for more populous states or just having the popular vote outright determine the