As expected, Democrats in Congress are introducing measures that will eliminate the Electoral College. California Senator Dianne Feinstein calls the process of electing a President an "anachronism" and that it is time to "bring our democracy into the 21st century". Fortunately, 3/4's of the states would have to ratify a Constitutional amendment for that to happen--so this is just demagoguery at its finest.
But an opinion piece in the Washington Post on Tuesday went even a step further--calling for the elimination of states altogether. Author Lawrence Samuel believes that the notion of having 50 states is "outdated and un-necessary". At first he tries to argue that running 50 state governments is "expensive" and a waste of money. Samuel then claims that the experiences of those living in New York really aren't that different than those of us living here in Wisconsin--so why shouldn't we all just be "the same"?
Taking away the bitterness over the "won the popular vote--lost the Electoral College vote" aspect of the recent election, Liberals would still love the idea of eliminating states because it results in greater consolidation of Government power. Why have 50-legislatures decide what the law of individual states should be when you can a smaller--and easier-to-control--Congress decide what is best for every single person in the country?
Gone would be individualized education standards, penalties for crimes, tax rates and business regulations approved by those that believe that is what is best for their state. Those would be replaced by single directives coming down from even larger bureaucracies in Washington, DC. And who would you be able to hold accountable for that governance? Not the 132 state representatives and the governor we currently have in Madison--but the nine members of Congress that would represent what used to be "Wisconsin" and the President. (I'm not sure what would become of the Senate--as that is the chamber that was designed to share power equally between all of the states--and liberals just want their densely-populated urban centers to control national power.)
Doing away with the states would also require designing a new flag--as thirteen stripes and fifty stars wouldn't mean anything anymore. I'd expect that the newly-created Federal Bureau of National Symbols would come up with a design featuring rainbow colors and a unicorn because that will make everyone "feel good" when they look at. And perhaps they wouldn't even think about losing yet another bit of their individuality.