This election may be the final straw for the electoral college. If the popular vote and the electoral college, are once more out of sync, representatives from the larger states might be stumping for its repeal next week. It would probably require a constitutional amendment to change it, but I’m not sure off hand.
When I was teaching Introduction to American Government, I would often struggle to describe this system to the class. Each states has a certain number of points based on their number of senators and representatives. And the winner in that state takes all the points, and the loser, even if he lost by one vote, gets nothing. I would make a diagram on the board and give some examples of possible scenarios. I would like to say that my clear and direct teaching style turned on 50 light bulbs that day, but the final exam showed that only 40% really got it.
Most people just don’t understand the electoral college.
Why have such a system, one of the smarter students would inevitably ask. Why not just count all the votes?
Well, I would explain, the electoral college assures that smaller states like Montana and South Dakota aren’t forgotten. And more importantly, it brings about a decisive winner. Those who win, win big, which protects our democracy from lingering questions and doubts about the winner. After the 2000 election, I added that the Gore/Bush election was an anomoly not likely to even happen again
Hah! Here we are again. I can’t use that line about the decisive winner again to my students again. Can someone please tell me what I’m supposed to say next semester, when the smart kid asks me why have an electoral college?
Apt. 11d 
Well, I’m the wrong person to answer this, since I oppose the Electoral College. It throws away information that it shouldn’t. And it doesn’t need to.
And I think the wholesale ignoring of the non-swing states in this election is pretty ridiculous. So much for one person, one vote.
LikeLike
Perhaps I’m being a dolt, but I don’t understand how the electoral college makes sure the smaller states aren’t forgotten. Aren’t they typically somewhat ignored? This election seems an exception (Hawaii, e.g.), since it’s so close, but when have the candidates really courted votes in those states?
And it seems to take away the vote/voice of those voting Democratic in Republican states.
LikeLike
The system is broken, and it’s up to your generation to fix it.
That’s what I tell my students.
LikeLike
I think the EC has it’s advantages. There’s always some city with serious vote fraud. But the EC means that that can only poison one state, not the whole election.
The EC does NOT mean that smaller states are not forgotten, but it does give them a bit of extra weight beyond their numbers. I think that’s a good thing. The founding fathers wanted a federal republic, and this helps preserve a little of that. Small and possibly quirky or innovative states are a little less overshadowed by the big ones.
And the founders did not believe in direct democracy. They wanted democracy diverted through various filters and round-abouts, to make it less volatile and avoid the “tyranny of the majority.” Living in the huge and trendy state of California, I suspect it’s a good thing that our fads and lunacies are diluted a bit because we can only effect our own EV’s.
Having the popular and electoral votes out of sync may seem unfair, but the campaigns aren’t TRYING to win the popular vote. If Bush and Gore had both been trying to maximise popular votes, Bush might well have won them! There is no way to know.
I don’t go for the argument that the EC takes away the “vote/voice of those voting Democratic in Republican states.” Both because there are a multitude of other offices and measures voted for–this isn’t a dictatorship. Also the EC is a game with higher odds but also higher stakes. If those Dems can flip a state, then their payoff is all the bigger. And in lots of states Republican officeholders act liberal to get elected (and vice versa of course.)
Popular vote sounds good to theorist and “purist” types, but if you put those sort of folks in charge, you get a mess like Australia.
LikeLike
John Wediner: And the founders did not believe in direct democracy. They wanted democracy diverted through various filters and round-abouts, to make it less volatile and avoid the “tyranny of the majority.”
What do you think we have right now? Although that has less to do with the EC and more to do with the plurality voting system.
No, they didn’t believe in direct democracy. They believed electors would make independent decisions. This current system is an unintended side-effect, just like the two-party system. They weren’t yet aware of Duverger’s Law.
I don’t go for the argument that the EC takes away the “vote/voice of those voting Democratic in Republican states.” Both because there are a multitude of other offices and measures voted for–this isn’t a dictatorship.
A Republican in a heavily Democratic county gets zero representation at the federal state, or county level. Zero. No, it’s not a dictatorship. It’s, as you say, tyranny of the majority.
Also the EC is a game with higher odds but also higher stakes. If those Dems can flip a state, then their payoff is all the bigger. And in lots of states Republican officeholders act liberal to get elected (and vice versa of course.)
It shouldn’t be a game. The quality of the representation of the voters shouldn’t depend on how well their most representative politicians play a game, especially one involving this amount of uncertainty. The system should, by design, select their most representative politicians. Ability to play this game is a poor predictor of how representative they are or how competently they will govern.
Getting rid of the EC would help. A much bigger help would be switching to Approval Voting or the Condorcet Method instead of plurality. For single-seat elections, anyway, using Proportional Representation or Single-Transferable Vote for multi-seat elections in Congress. And keeping the checks and balances, not switching to a Parliamentary system.
LikeLike
College
Latest
LikeLike
Education online : An article from: Healthcare Executive
As the economy continues to struggle and the job market grows ever tighter, many healthcare executives are finding it a good time to go back to school. Improving your skills through continuing education seminars or an advanced degree program will make …
LikeLike