This shift would likely benefit that party for more than a generation. 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. Abolishing the Electoral College seems to be the next logical step in that process. Then the 2020 census will be valid for the 2024 and 2028 elections. 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. There have been a total of five candidates who have won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College, with the most recent cases occurring in the 2016 and 2000 . Editors Note: In 2016, we asked two professors to debate whether the Electoral College should cease to be the mechanism used for selecting the U.S. president. As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Alternative 1: Two electoral votes to national popular vote winner; state winner-take-all for the remainder, *Each of these races included faithless electors, such that the total of electoral votes, as shown, does not equal 538. Another 15 legislatures with varying degrees of Republican control would also need to ratify such an amendment for the Electoral College to be removed. Frequently Asked Questions | National Archives That is not to say the Electoral College is without its advantages. ** Adjusted Maine to act as one state rather than separate EV districts. 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. Iowa farmers might lose out to California union workers since their population numbers are larger. What happens if a candidate with electoral votes dies or becomes There can be distinctive advantages to one party in a decade where three election cycles are possible. It's time to renew your membership and keep access to free CLE, valuable publications and more. The correct number is 102. This imbalance is primarily a 21st century phenomenon and it could, of course, change in the years to come as some states grow and other states shrink in population. It is the formal body that elects the President and Vice President of the United States. {{currentYear}} American Bar Association, all rights reserved. Yes. Technically, it is . It seems to me that the original system may have been superior to what we now have. However, in the five presidential elections of the 21st century, two ended up with the winner of the popular vote losing the Electoral College. It also stops the distribution process where California gets 55 votes, but a state like Delaware only gets 3. In 2000 Vice President Al Gore won the popular vote against Governor George W. Bush by 543,895. Abolish the electoral college. Under the current system, voters in each state cast their ballots for electors, of which 270 are necessary to win. Fully overhauling the way the president is selected would take a Constitutional amendment, which would require the votes of two-thirds of the U.S. House of Representatives, two-thirds of the Senate, and three-fourths of the states. This system allows minorities to have a bigger microphone for their concerns as well. The founders fought like cats and dogs over how the president should be chosen. The only difference is that in this unique structure, the voice of the minority can actually shout down the desires of the majority. Back in 1787, when the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were trying to figure out how the President should be chosen, some wanted the Congress to choose, and . But there is something called the National Popular Vote Compact. There would need to be a Constitutional amendment if the compact idea doesnt work. Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke said there is a "lot of wisdom" in the idea and Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., also said she's open to it. Without the Electoral College, big states like California and New York would dominate elections. Here are the yea and the nay. Its how we run every election in the country, except the most important one of all. But specifics vary. If the Electoral College system begins to prevent, on a regular basis, the popular vote winner from becoming president, it will create systemic challenges. 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. Do you agree? Alternative 2: Two electoral votes to national popular vote winner; remainder apportioned by congressional district, *Each of these races included faithless electors, such that the total of electoral votes, as shown, does not equal 538. The state also reelected their Republican governor in 2020. It is a process that allows the people to choose who serves in the White House instead of throwing it into Congress. In the history of the United States, there have been six presidential elections that would have qualified for this issue and three of them have occurred since 1968. Most people in America want the Electoral College gone, and they want to select a president based on who gets the most votes nationally, polls say. 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. Do you think any of these arguments, or others, are convincing reasons for preserving the Electoral College as it stands now? George W. Bush won the Electoral College in 2000 even though he received 0.5% less of the popular vote against Al Gore. A split of electoral votes has occurred once in each of these states. "Precisely what it does is proportionately advantages where the people are," Levy said. When a state passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it compels the state to award its electoral votes to whomever wins the national popular vote, regardless of which candidate won in that state. Maintaining the Electoral College may seem like the most politically expedient position for the Republican Party in the short term, but it may cause significant damage in the long term. Debate renewed in 2016 after theelectionof the fifth U.S. president who won the presidency despite losing the popular vote. Four of the electors came from the state of Washington. As a result, most are considered safe, that is, comfortably in hand for one party or the other. James Madison, known as the father of the Constitution, was very disturbed by the state winner-take-all rule, which he considered one of the central flaws of the Electoral College as it took shape in the early 19th century. First, there's the Constitutional problem. First, and most obviously, such a system 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. Myth No. The Electoral College consists of an elector selection, a group of people who will meet and vote for President and Vice President based on the results of their states election. But if youre a voter in the United States, theres a really good chance your vote doesnt count the way you think it does. .just the large States - the Cities would end up running the Country. Mr. Wegman argues that reforming the Electoral College isnt a partisan issue its a fairness issue. Many of them were unhappy with the results. Instead of dealing with these complications, a simple majority vote would always speak of the will of the people. 61% of Americans Support Abolishing Electoral College by Megan Brenan Story Highlights 61% prefer amending Constitution to use popular vote to elect president 89% of Democrats, 23% of Republicans. This spring, numerous candidates for president expressed support for either abolishing or changing the Electoral College, which ultimately picks the U.S. president. So if the results of most presidential elections tend to reflect the choice of the people, why do we still have the Electoral College? Did you know that when Americans vote in the 2020 presidential election, theyre not actually voting for the next president? 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. Two closely watched cases arising from the 2016 electoral process, however, might provide the justices with an opportunity to do just that. If the U.S. were to abolish the electoral college, then the restrictions that territories experience against voting in this election would disappear. It took time for people to learn what was happening in the nations capital. Switching to this standard system would not likely create an adverse result. The Constitution provides no express role for the states after appointment of its presidential electors, the 10th Circuit panel said, adding, Once appointed, (electors) are free to vote as they choose.. The primary benefit of the electoral college is that it works to protect the best interests of the minority in every election. Thats almost 1.5 billion votes. Adding even more candidates into this discussion without the protections of this structure could create circumstances where someone with less than 35% of the vote could potentially win a four-year term. The compact would only go into effect once the number of states involved surpasses the 270 Electoral College vote threshold that is required to win the presidency. Only two Republicans voted for someone other than Trump and Pence. 2016 is on track to be the fifth election in U.S. political history in which the candidate who wins the most votes is not the one elected president -- giving rise to another round of calls to. Christine Stenglein and Saku Gopinath provided research support for this post. And this year, who knows? Its also the only place where the District of Columbia functions as a state since the 23rd Amendment allocates 3 electors to it. A second variation would be to award two Electoral College votes from each state to the winner of the national popular vote and award the remaining electors to the winner of each congressional district (CD). Whether youre Republican or Democrat, the Electoral College is unfair. The reasons for the Electoral College may not be relevant any more. It causes some votes to have greater weight than others. An amendment hasn't been adopted since the 27th, in 1992, and one hasn't been adopted relatively quickly since the 26th, which took 100 days from proposal to adoption in 1971. So lets put the power to select the president where it actually belongs, in the hands of all the people. As far as the 2016 election is concerned, Hillary Clinton would still be the likely winner if the Electoral College didn't exist. Were already letting women, former slaves, and 18-year-olds vote, changing the structure of the election since the countrys founding. The Electoral College Is At The Heart Of Debate Over Vote - NPR You may have heard this one in high school. Myth No. There have been three: John Quincy Adams, Benjamin Harrison and George W. Bush. Having the states play an autonomous role in presidential elections, it is said, reinforces the division of governing authority between the nation and the states. As far as the 2016 election is concerned, Hillary Clinton would still be the likely winner if the Electoral College didn't exist. The main problem with the Electoral College today is not, as both its supporters and detractors believe, the disproportionate power it gives smaller states. This is just one way the legacy of slavery still taints our politics today. The electoral college ignores the will of the people. It was replaced by party conventions, which eventually were replaced (almost) with strings of single or multiple state primaries and caucuses. Blue states give all their electors to the Democrat, no matter how many Republicans voted for their candidate; vice versa in the red states. Students, watch the video and read Mr. Wegmans Op-Ed, and then tell us: What does democracy mean to you? As Americans look at their election processes, a complete review of the pros and cons of abolishing the Electoral College is useful when taking this unique structure into account. Warren says she wants to get rid of the Electoral College, and vote for president using a national popular vote. And this was an effort that was supported by the AFL-CIO, the Chamber of Commerce, the American Bar Association, and progressive and liberal groups outside. FiveThirtyEight polls-only forecast have predicted. The effort in Congress to overhaul America's election system followed the contentious 1968 presidential contest. Under these laws, which states adopted to gain political advantage in the nations early years, even though it was never raised by the framers states award all their electors to the candidate with the most popular votes in their state. Americas auto industry auto industry auto industry At least in part because its located mostly in swing states, like Michigan and Ohio, states whose electoral votes he needed to win. Today, 48 states use winner-take-all. 14 Pros and Cons of Abolishing the Electoral College