Learn more here. If you submit a question as a comment on this article, we might use it during the live event. It is within a states authority under Article II, Section 1 to impose a fine on electors for failing to uphold their pledge, the court said in an 8-1 opinion. Jacob Levy, of McGill University, disagreed with that argument. The Constitution is silent on whether states or the electors themselves ultimately can decide which candidate gets the electors vote, and the U.S. Supreme Court has not addressed that issue in the handful of cases it has considered related to the Electoral College. Polls from FiveThirtyEight polls-only forecast have predicted. 3Qs: Should the Electoral College be abolished? - News When Americans are polled about the Electoral College, most of them say that they want it to disappear. Started in the mid-2000s, the NPVIC is a fairly straightforward system that capitalizes on the constitutional guarantee that states are free to determine the manner in which they award their electoral votes. As far as the 2016 election is concerned, Hillary Clinton would still be the likely winner if the Electoral College didn't exist. In his video, Mr. Wegman offers counterarguments to what he calls myths about the Electoral College. Suddenly, every voter will count, no matter where they live. Warren says she wants to get rid of the Electoral College, and vote for president using a national popular vote. Two of those elections have occurred since 2000. Anyone can read what you share. The cost of conducting a nationwide recount could be hundreds of millions of dollars, which is money that may not always be in the budget. Getting rid of the Electoral College would radicalize politics. Even though proponents of the Electoral College want it to stay so that every state can have a specific say in the outcome of the election, the candidates are already starting to behave in the same ways that people fear they would when targeting a majority population groups. The Electoral College is outlined in Article II, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. It is the formal body that elects the President and Vice President of the United States. Its complicated, outdated, unrepresentative in a word, undemocratic. Switching to this standard system would not likely create an adverse result. Whether youre Republican or Democrat, the Electoral College is unfair. The following table shows how this would have changed the outcome in the two contested elections of the 21st century and includes 2004 for comparison. In the video above, we delve into the reasons people give for keeping the Electoral College and why theyre wrong. It doesnt have to be this way. Hamilton believed that it would prevent the Office of the President from falling into the lot of a person who was not endowed with the requisite qualifications to serve the American people. Democracy is, at its core, about fair, equal representation one person, one vote. 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren calls for abolishing the Electoral College and moving to a national popular vote: Every vote matters #WarrenTownHall https://t.co/pPFMVywETf pic.twitter.com/yy0J0HgAjc. Changing or eliminating the Electoral College can be accomplished only by an amendment to the Constitution, which requires the consent of two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states. For years, a majority of Americans have opposed the Electoral College. The state also reelected their Republican governor in 2020. For example, in 1967, 58 percent favored its abolition, while in 1981, 75 percent of . But reforming the Electoral College does not rank high among our national problems. If the Electoral College was eliminated, the power to elect the President would rest solely in the hands of a few of our largest states and cities, greatly diminishing the voice of smaller populated states. Yet, ratification happens not by popular vote but by state legislature. Electoral vote totals will equal 538. Abolish the electoral college. Stanford University. 11. The chances of a recount would increase dramatically with election. Your membership has expired - last chance for uninterrupted access to free CLE and other benefits. #Marianne2024 . Given that a change would require a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and three-quarters of the state legislatures, it is not going to happen. The U.S. Census creates the allocations of electoral votes that each state receives. In 2016, the results were even more dramatic. Here are the yea and the nay. They want the option to select a president based on who gets the most votes nationally. After reading the article and watching the video, what questions do you have for Mr. Wegman? But after the presidential election in 1800 resulted in an acrimonious tie vote between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, the12th Amendmentwas ratified in 1804. Third, a national election might provide a cure for the delegitimation of presidential authority that has afflicted the last three presidencies. The effort in Congress to overhaul America's election system followed the contentious 1968 presidential contest. John Locher/AP Its no wonder the candidates fixate on issues that matter to specific groups of voters in swing states, like fracking in Pennsylvania This is my 13th visit. or prescription drug benefits in Florida. The two parties have chosen the same year in which to nominate a person whom large numbers of Americans, probably a majority, regard as unfit (though not for the same reason). But reforming the Electoral College does not rank high among our national problems. Source: Daily Kos Elections. Such an effort would likely receive little or no Republican support. Not one was a first-rank president, but their selection did not seriously injure the democratic character of our system. If a candidate wins the popular vote in a state, even by a single vote, they get all of that states electoral votes. 10. Christine Stenglein and Saku Gopinath provided research support for this post. Despite California having millions of more people living in the state compared to Wyoming, the weight of a vote is 30% less. {{currentYear}} American Bar Association, all rights reserved. Supporters of a national popular vote argue something must be done; the Electoral College disproportionately inflates the influence of rural areas while undervaluing the votes of cities. After a long battle in Florida Bush won the state narrowly, giving him an Electoral College victory of 271 to 266 over Al Gore. Jesse Wegman, the author of the Opinion pieces above, is one of the guests on our Oct. 22 live panel for students. But in the end, Republicans and Democrats are virtually tied. Generally, we count on the Republican and Democratic parties to nominate not the best people, but candidates who combine a degree of popular support with the experience and temperament to govern. In the first instance, states could decide to award 2 Electoral College votes (EVs) to the winner of the national popular vote (NPV) and the remainder to the winner of the state. There are three basic arguments in favor of the system the framers of the Constitution gave us, with little sense of how it would actually work. There were two additional votes for Sanders that were invalidated in Minnesota and one for Kasich in Colorado. The politicians are tapping into what's become a popular position with many voters, especially Democrats. I used to like the idea of the Popular Vote, but now realize the Electoral College is far better for the U.S.A. Gregg says that change would radicalize politics. However, in the five presidential elections of the 21st century, two ended up with the winner of the popular vote losing the Electoral College. But get this, the way the Electoral College actually functions today isnt even enshrined in the Constitution. If you live in a state where youre in the political minority, your vote is effectively erased. The winner-take-all method is nowhere in the Constitution. It's time to abolish the Electoral College - Brookings There have also been five elections where the eventual president didnt win a majority of the vote, including Trump in 2016. Find all our Student Opinion questions in this column. Have an idea for a Student Opinion question? And the most recent major occasion took place in 1969, 1970, when there was a strong bipartisan effort to abolish the electoral college and have us utilize a national popular vote. Nonetheless, it is likely the most viable alternative to the current Electoral College system. As we begin the third decade of the 21st century, change benefits the Democrats. Moreover, the electoral college method preserved the two compromises over representationthe three-fifths clause and the big state-small state compromiseand guarded against a fracturing of votes for many candidates, which they thought might occur once George Washington was no longer available as a nationally respected consensus candidate. Why? 4. Under the current plan, states that join will not activate the compact until enough states have joined to total 270 electoral votes. Instead of a politician trying to appeal to someone with specific needs, the adoption of a general platform that maximizes votes in urban centers would become the emphasis of each party. Critics of the system would argue that the elections of Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump are evidence that this impact is no longer present in U.S. politics. This shift would likely benefit that party for more than a generation. That is, the compact does not go into effect until there is a critical mass of states for it to be effective. In May, the Washington State Supreme Courtuphelda state election law that said an elector who did not vote for the candidate he pledged to support could be fined up to $1,000 in civil penalties. Instead, theyre voting for their states representatives in the Electoral College, who will then vote for the president. Including prescription drug benefits and all seniors at every income level. But they spend almost no time talking about issues that matter to millions of voters elsewhere, like public transportation in New York or climate change in California. Three happened in the 19th century; none in the 20th century and two in the 21st century. Getting Rid Of The Electoral College Isn't Easy - Bustle Only Rutherford Hayes, with a 3% difference, won the electoral college despite being in the minority. For instance, in 1900 New York was the biggest state in the union with 7,268,894 people and the state with the median population, Louisiana, had 1,381,625 people. The only point in this election where the possibility of either of the candidates losing the popular vote but still claiming an electoral victory was on July 30, when a FiveThirtyEight model showed Clinton clinching the popular vote by less than 1 percent, but still losing to Trump by two electoral votes. 61% of Americans Support Abolishing Electoral College - Gallup.com Should we abolish the Electoral College? - Constitution Center Were already letting women, former slaves, and 18-year-olds vote, changing the structure of the election since the countrys founding. No other mode of presidential elections would be fully consistent with our underlying commitment to the equality of all citizens. That meant more power for those states under an Electoral College system, and slave states didnt want to give up that power. Source: Daily Kos Elections. This toolkit provides guidance and resources to those associated with community colleges who are interested in either creating a pathway program to law school or enhancing an existing program. And this year, who knows? So far, 15 states plus the District of Columbia have joined in for a total of 196 electoral votes, just 74 more. The point is, even accounting for demographic changes, neither party has a built-in advantage under a popular-vote system. However, a constitutional amendment is not the only means by which an alternative to the current Electoral College can be implemented. FiveThirtyEight polls-only forecast have predicted. The current system for electing a U.S. president traces back to 1787. It's another way the system ensures it's perpetuity. As far as the 2016 election is concerned, Hillary Clinton would still be the likely winner if the Electoral College didn't exist. And yet we have generally accepted it for centuries on the assumption it serves an important purpose. Redirecting to https://m.startribune.com/one-clear-result-of-the-2020-election-at-last-let-s-abolish-the-electoral-college/. It channels presidential politics into a two-party system, which is superior to multiparty systems where fringe factions can exercise too much leverage. 1, that Democrats will win a popular vote every time. A second argument holds less populous states deserve the further electoral weight they gain through the senatorial bump giving each state two electors, because their minority status entitles them to additional political protection. To this day, people are still arguing that Al Gore was the real winner and debating whether the recount in Florida was accurate the state whose electors propelled Bush to the top. There are currently 538 electors up for grabs in an election, which means a majority of 270 is necessary to elect the President. This ensures that smaller rural and industrial communities will have their issues addressed by those seeking office. The winner of an election should be the person who gets the most votes. In fact, there is already a movement brewing among states to agree to award their electors to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote. There would need to be a Constitutional amendment if the compact idea doesnt work. I think it would make more sense to split the electoral votes based on the state-wide vote so if a state has 10 electoral votes and the election goes 60% to 40%, the candidates gets 6 votes and 4 votes respectively. The NPV would effectively abolish the Electoral College and co-opt even those states who did not join the compact into accepting an electoral regime they never agreed to or approved. "Precisely what it does is proportionately advantages where the people are," Levy said. This means that every election, 80 percent of American voters, roughly 100 million people, get ignored. "It really does over-represent some sparsely populated states, and it provides some skew and bias to our system that I just don't think is healthy anymore," said Paul Gronke, a political scientist at Reed College. Why did they lose? The small towns in the United States, along with all of the rural areas, would become marginalized if this system were to be entirely abolished. Do you think this means the system is broken? Third, defenders of the Electoral College also claim that it supports the underlying value of federalism. This perception is reinforced by the red- and blue-state imagery that controls our view of the electoral process. By 2019, the median state was Kentucky with 4,467,673 which made it 11% of the population of California, the biggest state in the union with 39,512,223 people. 6. Remember what we said back in Myth No. But under this system, those Republican votes might as well not exist. But explaining exactly how it does this remains a mystery. Article V sets up the manner by which an amendment is passed. Still, the advantages are uncertain and relatively minor. A lot of people dont even want to talk about changing the Electoral College because of this idea. The places where there are more people become the top priority, especially if there is a chance to swing some votes. In winner-take-all states, all electoral votes cast for the state are assigned to the candidate who gets the most electoral votes. Is the Electoral College a Problem? Does It Need to Be Fixed?