When George H.W. Bush was president, he embarrassed himself 
a little when he actually visited a retail outlet and 
seemed quite impressed by the fancy gizmo used to scan the 
price of his purchase. I guess being tech-savvy doesn’t run 
in the Bush family. 
 
The current president’s seeming lack of understanding about 
all things technical has led to his unpopular ban on 
government-funded embryonic stem cell research, except on a 
few lines of cells that already were in existence before 
the ban. 
 
His own personal “core values” have led to his intransigent 
refusal to lift the restrictions despite pleas from even 
members of his own party to loosen them.  
 
It could be that his core values are only a smokescreen to 
justify his unbelievably stubborn personality. 
 
Another example of President Bush’s obstinacy can be seen 
by his continuation of his current Iraq war policy. Despite 
the fact that he finally had to admit that there were never 
any weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam Hussein had 
nothing to do with the Sept. 11 terror attacks, he still 
insists that he was justified in attacking Iraq even 
without global support. 
 
But in Indiana, it makes no difference that Bush may have 
opponents. Indiana will cast all its electoral votes for 
Bush again this year. It doesn’t matter that perhaps 40 
percent or more of voters will choose Kerry, the minority 
opinion carries no weight here; Bush will win by 
acclimation, taking 100 percent of Indiana’s delegation to 
the Electoral College. 
 
Of course, it’s the same in other states. A few states tend 
always to vote Democratic while others nearly always vote 
Republican. Indiana has gone Republican in all presidential 
elections for nearly 50 years.  
 
Is it any wonder why those who vote the minority feel 
disenfranchised? They get no representation in the 
Electoral College. 
 
Our Electoral College system is the reason why Bush is 
president today, despite not having won a majority of the 
popular vote. 
 
More people voted for Gore in 2000, yet Bush became 
president because of that antiquated method by which we 
choose to elect our president. 
 
There are two ways we could fix the problem, but one would 
require a constitutional amendment. The best way to make 
certain that everybody’s vote counts is to elect the 
president directly by eliminating the Electoral College.  
 
Senators were once chosen indirectly by the states. But a 
constitutional amendment changed that to allow the people 
to elect their senators directly. A similar amendment could 
allow voters to directly elect their president. 
 
A second method that could be employed would retain the 
Electoral College, but would still allow everyone’s vote to 
count. Instead of the winner-take-all method we currently 
use, states could choose to send an electoral delegation 
that would be closely representative of the proportion of 
votes cast in each state. 
 
If, for example, 42 percent of voters in Indiana cast a 
vote for Kerry and 58 percent vote for Bush, Indiana’s 
delegation to the Electoral College would include six who 
have committed to vote for Bush and five who have committed 
for Kerry. Nationally, it would mean that the electoral 
votes would more closely mirror the popular vote, and it 
could be done without a constitutional amendment. 
 
It may not eliminate ultra-close elections as we had in 
2000, but it would ensure that whoever won the most votes 
would become president. And, more importantly, it would 
mean that the votes of those Hoosiers who vote for the 
Democratic presidential candidate will actually count.