America's presidential electoral system

By Noralyn O. Dudt

AMERICA's electoral system has long baffled the world. A relic of another time, the Electoral College distorts results of the presidential election and thwarts the will of the people. Hillary  Clinton received almost three million votes more than Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election but still lost. During the 2000 presidential election, George W. Bush had fewer popular votes than Al Gore, but the electoral votes in Florida made Bush the winner.  There were three other occasions between 1960 and 1996—all because of an “antiquated” electoral process called the Electoral College.  Some experts have defended it, saying the process gives voice to less populated states. So, what is the Electoral College?

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. It was created by the framers of the US Constitution as an alternative to electing the president by popular vote or by Congress.

How to elect their president was among the thorny questions debated by the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, and one of the hardest to resolve. The Founding Fathers debated for months, with some arguing that Congress should pick the president while others insisted on a democratic popular vote.

After months of deliberation, they came to a compromise known as the Electoral College, a hybrid selection process that would ensure that large urban centers with significant populations would not dominate the election process and that the  needs of rural areas would not be neglected.  This hybrid selection was intended to incorporate the needs of rural areas, including less populated states, and urban regions to improve the interactions and diversity in the decision making process. And it had been effective and resilient. However, with recent debacles, i.e. the Jan. 6^th attack on the U.S. Capitol,  many are now questioning whether this is still the best way. With the advent of the internet and other forms of mass communications, this diversified decision process has been subverted to radicalize one group to create suspicions of the other. It has generated a lack of trust between different interests across the country and created divisions—deep divisions that are practically choking the path toward civil conversation and discussion. If enough distrust can be generated and channeled by various foreign and internal manipulators, the electoral process can be controlled and manipulated.

“The Electoral College was never intended to be the perfect system for picking the president,” commented several political science professors. 

“It wasn't like the Founders said, ‘Hey, what a great idea! This is the preferred method to select the chief executive, period’”, one professor said.

“They were tired, impatient, frustrated. They cobbled together this plan because they couldn't agree on anything else.”

At the time of  the Philadelphia convention in 1787, no other country in the world directly elected its chief executive, so the delegates were wading into uncharted territory. Further complicating the task was a deep-rooted distrust of executive power. After all, the fledgling nation had just fought its way out from under a tyrannical king and overreaching colonial governors. They didn't want another despot on their hands.

One group of delegates felt strongly that Congress should not have anything to do with picking the president. Such arrangement would provide  too much opportunity for chummy corruption between the executive and legislative branches. Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18^th century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong "democratic mob" would steer the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.

Out of those drawn-out debates came a compromise based on the idea of electoral intermediaries. These intermediaries wouldn't be picked by Congress or elected by the people. Instead, the states would each appoint independent “electors” who would cast the actual ballots for the presidency, after the popular votes are tallied in each State.

The Electoral College, many people say, is now a system that is outdated and convoluted that sometimes yields results contrary to the choice of the majority of American voters. On five occasions, as mentioned earlier,  including in two of the last six elections, candidates have won the Electoral College, and thus the presidency, despite losing the national popular vote. It incentivizes presidential campaigns to focus on a relatively small number of “swing states”. Together, these dynamics have spurred debate about the system's democratic legitimacy.

Proponents of the Electoral College believe that the system promotes Federalism and guarantees the roles of the states in the process. Proponents also identify the importance of the Electoral College in keeping all parts of the country involved in the process. They feel that the process forces candidates to pay attention to all States, especially in a close election. Other proponents suggest that a direct popular vote election might actually add to the costs of campaigning since the state boundaries would no longer be relevant. There's also an increased likelihood of voter fraud.

Electoral votes are allocated among the states based on the census. Every state is allocated a number of votes equal to the number of Senators and Representatives in its congressional delegation—two votes for its Senators in the US Senate plus a number of votes equal to the number of its Congressional districts. Under the 23^rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia (the capital city which is not a state) is allocated three electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College. Each State (which includes the District of Columbia for the Electoral College) decides how to appoint its electors; however, they must do so according to law enacted before Election Day. Currently all states use the popular vote results from the November general election to decide which political party chooses the individuals who are appointed.

All States, except for Maine and Nebraska, have a winner-take-all policy where the state looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. In California for example, if presidential candidate Kamala Harris gets 12 million votes,  and Donald Trump gets 10 million votes, the 55 electoral votes that is allocated for California would all go to Ms. Harris. Likewise, if Donald Trump receives 5 million votes in Pennsylvania while  Kamala Harris gets 4.5 million, the 19 electoral votes allocated for Pennsylvania would all go to Donald Trump. Even if the candidate wins by only one vote, the winner receives all of the electoral votes of that particular state. In an attempt to achieve the required 270 votes to win, candidate campaigns create a strategy for victory. Decisions have to be made on how much time to spend campaigning in each state. Some tend to lean strongly and consistently toward one party—these are called “safe states”.  “Blue states” are those that are “safe” Democratic states while “red states” are “safe” Republican states. Maryland is a “safe” blue state. And Montgomery County, where I have been residing the last 52 years, is the “bluest” county in a deep blue state. Bethesda is only 10 minutes away from  the DC line, and only a 20 minute-drive to the White House. In my 52 years here, I don't remember a presidential candidate (Democrat or Republican)  ever visiting Montgomery County, except for the occasional health check-up at Walter Reed Military Hospital where the president is required to have. A presidential candidate knows that Maryland has been consistent with voting a Democrat for president.  It doesn't mean that there are no Republicans in  Maryland—we have them in small pockets here and there,  in the western part of the state, in small towns toward the mountains, and in places at the Eastern shore.

“Battleground”  states, sometimes referred to as swing states, are those that are up for grabs, and generally decide the election. For example, when  Pennsylvania resident Scott Johnson (this is not his real name for privacy reasons)   first voted in a US presidential election, it was for Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976. He cast his ballot for Donald Trump in 2016. But after being disillusioned by Trump's response to the Covid-19 pandemic,  he chose Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 election. He said,  "it's almost 50/50 who I have voted for," of the political affiliations of his chosen presidential candidates over the years. It has never been related to (political) party. I kind of felt like I was voting for an individual."  Scott  is a classic  example of a swing voter.

 

Current allocations of Electoral votes

Alabama 9, Alaska 3, Arizona  11, Arkansas  6, California  55, Colorado  10, Connecticut  7, Delaware  3, District of Columbia  3, Florida  30, Georgia 16, Hawaii  4, Idaho 4, Illinois  19, Indiana 11, Iowa 6, Kansas 6, Kentucky  8, Louisiana  8, Maine  4, Maryland 10, Massachusetts  11, Michigan  15, Minnesota  10, Mississippi  6, Missouri  10, Montana  4, Nebraska  5, Nevada  6, New Hampshire  4, North Dakota  3, New Jersey  14, New Mexico  5, New York  28, North Carolina  16, Ohio  17, Oklahoma  7, Oregon 8, Pennsylvania  19, Rhode Island  4. South Carolina  9, South Dakota  3, Tennessee  11, Texas  40, Utah 6, Vermont  3, Virginia  13, Washington  12, West Virginia  4, Wisconsin  10, Wyoming  3

To make the United States a more representative democracy,  reformers are pushing for the presidency to be decided instead by the national popular vote, which would help ensure that every voter counts equally. One can argue that  one popular vote in Montana could end up worth, say 10 times more  than one popular vote in California. While the  majority clamors for a change in the system,  eliminating the Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment.

Experts believe that there are only a handful of states (the swing states) that could possibly be won by Kamala Harris (Democrat), or Donald Trump (Republican). Seven of them—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan,  Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin could hold the key to the White House. Now in the final months of the election, both the Harris and the Trump campaigns are at full throttle to win over undecided voters in these states.

Registered voters will vote on November 5^th this year. Votes will be counted and the total number of the  popular vote will be taken by the electors (Electoral College) to their respective state capital on the first Tuesday, after the second Wednesday of December (between Dec. 14 and 20).  Each state's electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress on the 6^th of January following the meeting of the electors. Members of the House and Senate meet in the House Chamber to conduct the official count of the electoral votes. The Vice President, as President of the Senate,  presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The new President is inaugurated on Jan. 20. The outgoing president leaves the White House just before the new president is inaugurated. Transfer of power has been going smoothly since George Washington transferred his executive power to John Adams in 1797, and Barack Obama to Donald Trump in 2017. Joseph Biden won the 2020 presidential election but on the day that he was to be officially confirmed by the House, the Capitol Building in Washington DC was attacked by a mob of supporters of then-U.S. president Donald Trump, two months after his defeat. The attack disrupted the joint Session of Congress convened to certify Joseph Biden's victory over Trump. Five people were killed including one Capitol police officer who was beaten by rioters. Many others were injured. Senators and Representatives, along with the ballot box were shepherded to secure locations by Capitol Police Others barricaded themselves behind  doors. CBS NEWS showed footage of gallows being constructed at the west front of the Capitol in the early morning hours of that day. On Jan. 6, then-Vice President Mike Pence was presiding over the joint session of Congress to certify the Electoral College count. He had been pressured by Trump to unilaterally overturn the 2020 election. Pence refused to do so, while outside the Capitol,  protesters and rioters around the gallows and noose chanted,  "Hang Mike Pence." 

The heavily-armed, Trump-incited mob attack on Jan. 6, 2021 was an attack not just on the U.S. Capitol building,  but also on democracy and the rule of law.

 

Noralyn Onto Dudt was a registered Republican until 2006. She and her husband Philip changed party affiliation when they started "smelling the coffee." Although their preferences lean Democratic, both are open to voting for the better man or woman whose main goal is to serve the best interests of the  American people, irrespective of political party.