The Electoral College: A Thorny Issue in American Presidential Elections

The Electoral College, a system established by the Founding Fathers, remains a subject of intense debate in American politics. Its supporters tout its ability to give every state a voice in presidential elections, while critics argue that it can undermine the principle of "one person, one vote." The debate over its continued use resurfaced during the 2016 presidential election, when Donald Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by more than 2.8 million votes but still won the presidency by securing the majority of electoral votes.

What is the Electoral College?

The Electoral College is not a physical place; it's a process defined in the U.S. Constitution for electing the president and vice president. Instead of directly voting for the president, citizens vote for a slate of electors who then cast the actual votes for president. Each state is allocated a number of electors equal to its total number of representatives in Congress (House + Senate). Including Washington, D.C.’s three electors, there are currently 538 electors in all.

How Does It Work?

On election day, voters are technically casting a vote for a specific elector. Most states employ a "winner-take-all" method, where the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state receives all of its electoral votes. However, Nebraska and Maine use a district system: the candidate who wins the state's overall popular vote receives two electors, and one elector from each congressional district is awarded to the popular vote winner in that district.

Each state's political parties choose their own slate of potential electors. Electors meet in their respective states in December after the presidential election to cast their votes for president and vice president on separate ballots.

While the Constitution doesn't explicitly require electors to vote for the candidate chosen by their state's popular vote, some states have laws that do. Electors who vote against the popular vote are known as "faithless electors" and may face fines, disqualification, replacement, or even prosecution, depending on the state.

Historical Context and Evolution

The Founding Fathers likely created the Electoral College for a variety of reasons, including concerns about the separation of powers, the balance between small and large states, slavery, and the perceived dangers of direct democracy. The system has been revised by the Twelfth Amendment (1804), the Fourteenth Amendment (1868), and the Twenty-third Amendment (1961).

Pros of the Electoral College

Protects Minority Voices: The Electoral College was intended to protect the voices of the minority from being overwhelmed by the will of the majority and to prevent states with larger populations from having undue influence.
Ensures Broad Representation: The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting the President of the United States. If the election depended solely on the popular vote, then presidential candidates could limit campaigning to heavily populated areas or specific regions. The winner will actually be expected to serve the needs of the entire country. Without the Electoral College, rural areas and small towns would not be represented.
Guarantees Certainty: The Electoral College can preclude calls for recounts or demands for runoff elections, giving certainty to presidential elections. The electoral process can also create a larger mandate to increase the president’s credibility.
Promotes National Unity: By requiring candidates to campaign and win support across multiple states and regions, the Electoral College encourages them to develop platforms with a national focus, fostering a sense of unity and shared purpose.
Preserves Federalism: The Electoral College preserves the principles of federalism that are essential to our constitutional republic. The Electoral College prevents presidential candidates from winning an election by focusing solely on high-population urban centers and dense media markets, forcing them to seek the support of a larger cross-section of the American electorate.

Cons of the Electoral College

Disproportionate Power to Swing States: The Electoral College gives too much power to swing states and allows presidential elections to be decided by a handful of states.
Undermines Representative Democracy: The Electoral College undermines representative democracy and the notion of one person, one vote.
Rooted in Slavery and Racism: The “minority” interests the Founding Fathers intended the Electoral College to protect were those of enslavers and states with legal slavery. The racism at the root of the Electoral College persists, suppressing the votes of people of color in favor of voters from largely homogeneously white states.
Potential for Conflicting Outcomes: The Electoral College can lead to situations where the candidate with the most popular votes loses the election, undermining the principle of majority rule and potentially leading to feelings of disenfranchisement among voters.
Vote Suppression: The biggest problem with the Electoral College is that it encourages vote suppression.

Unusual Electoral College Scenarios

Winning the popular vote but losing the election: It is possible to win the Electoral College but lose the popular vote. This happened in 2016, 2000, and three times in the 1800s.
What happens if no candidate wins the majority of electoral votes?: If no candidate receives the majority of electoral votes, the vote goes to the House of Representatives.

The Electoral College in the Public Debate

The debate over the Electoral College remains a prominent issue in American politics. On one side of the argument, critics say that the Electoral College can lead to outcomes where the presidency is secured without winning the popular vote. This concern stems from the 2000 and 2016 elections, where Democratic candidates won the popular vote but lost the presidency due to the Electoral College system. As a result, critics say that this mechanism disproportionately amplifies the influence of less populous states and swing states, and effectively sidelines the majority’s choice.

Arguments for Abolishing the Electoral College

Promotes Equality: Replacing the Electoral College with a national popular vote would conform to the dominant democratic value that has prevailed in American politics ever since the one-person, one-vote reapportionment rulings of the early 1960s. Our votes would count the same wherever they were cast. No other mode of presidential elections would be fully consistent with our underlying commitment to the equality of all citizens.
Eliminates Battleground State Phenomenon: A national popular vote would eliminate the “battleground state” phenomenon that has now become the key feature of post-convention campaigning, leaving most Americans alienated from the decisive phase of presidential elections. In a truly national election, parties and candidates would have the incentive to turn out their votes wherever they were, fostering a deeper sense of engagement across the whole population.
Legitimizes Presidential Authority: A national election might provide a cure for the delegitimation of presidential authority that has afflicted the last three presidencies.

Alternatives and Potential Reforms

Several alternatives and potential reforms to the Electoral College have been proposed over the years, including:

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact: An agreement among states to award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote.
Proportional Allocation of Electors: Splitting electors in proportion to the percentage of the state vote that each candidate gets.
Congressional District Method: Awarding electors based on the winner of each congressional district, similar to the system used in Maine and Nebraska.

tags: #electoral #college #pros #and #cons