The Electoral College is as essential to maintaining American federalism as the Bill of Rights.
The system for electing American presidents is fit for purpose. For the President of the United States to be effective, he must unite the Union. We must recognise that the United States is different from other nations in that it is not a nation in the traditional sense, the American culture is not derivative of one ethnicity. America was not settled with ideas of national unification in mind and so national unity must be fought for. If the President does not unite the Union, the effects are dire. In 1860, Lincoln, despite winning the popular vote, won less than 3% of the Maryland vote, less than 1% of the Kentucky vote, and received no votes in the South. Predictably, the Civil War followed.
The primary area of concern with the Electoral College comes in its preference for voters who live in low-population states. In 2016, a Wyomingite had 268% more voting power than a Texan did, when electing the President.
Furthermore, some have argued that the defence of the Electoral College is motivated by desires to keep power in the hands of rural, white voters. In 2016, Patrick Thornton of Washingtonian, wrote a piece decrying the injustice that, due to the racial demographics of the largest states (where individual votes matter least), Hispanic votes counted for about 9/10 of white votes. In response to the commonly cited rural representation, he wrote that, “and… protecting rural interests, is already covered by the Senate.” However, if we recognise that geographical (and thus cultural) diversity matters, why shouldn’t this consideration extend to the executive branch as well? Until a supermajority of Americans live in megacities, it is incredibly important for Presidents to have the support of rural areas.
Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that popular votes discourage candidates from appealing to anyone outside of large population centres. Andrew Cuomo, Governor of New York, has governed the state since 2011, but has still not visited three of its counties: Chenango County, Fulton County and Livingston County. Another ten of its counties have received just one visit in the same period. The state’s use of a popular vote for gubernatorial elections has meant that Cuomo can afford to ignore small counties. In March 2019, the Editors at the National Review, a conservative magazine, wrote that, “But the Electoral College guarantees that candidates who seek the only nationally elected office in America must attempt to appeal to as broad a geographic constituency as possible — large states and small, populous and rural — rather than retreating to their preferred pockets and running up the score.”The Editors’ argument rests on the premise that states should be valued more than cities, regardless of population.
This argument is derived from a broader, federalist lens on America. Such an ideology recognises the need for national unity, while also respecting the different (and sometimes conflicting) customs of the states. The Editors would say that Americans are not only Americans, but citizens of their own states as well. The United States has been diverse from its inception; it is more a political union than a nation. The original thirteen colonies were all established at various times (from 1607 to 1732), under different monarchs (from James I to George II) and by different groups (religious minorities and the fleeing poor). The diversity of America is still present today. The twenty-two least populated states have about the same population as California. Yet those twenty-two states are far more various in their customs and identities than California. That list of twenty-two includes: traditionalist Mormon Utah, where more than 40% hail from the British Isles; Hawaii, the only state where Asian-Americans are a plurality; and New Mexico, where nearly 30% speak Spanish at home. Though diverse, California does not have the same number of distinct and thriving cultures. When we discuss uniting the nation, it is much more important to unite Hawaiians and Utahns than it is to unite the New York metropolitan area.
The second area of concern, although less addressed in mainstream politics, is the fact that the votes of the People can, in theory, be ignored. The November presidential election that we are familiar with is not the election from which the President is selected. The President is chosen by the Electoral College, a group of five hundred and thirty-eight electors. Although they pledge to vote in the same way the people have, there are currently two ongoing Supreme Court cases concerning whether electors have the right to vote against their state’s popular vote, Chiafalo v Washington , and Colorado Department of State v Baca.
I would argue that restricting elective powers to small groups is ideal. Only small groups are able to properly debate the merits and drawbacks of specific candidates, whereas, when the election is merely a popularity contest, the merits of a candidate, the majority of those voting, never have their views challenged. A brief survey of the Founding Fathers’ writings highlights their disdain for direct democracy. In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that, “There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”A strange mythos has evolved in the American psyche that the Founders were populists. They were a group of wealthy Englishmen, who intended to preserve the social order. They simply disliked George III.
The Founders did not trust the common man to make national policy. Perhaps informed having had their beliefs re-affirmed by the events of Shays’ Rebellion, they believed, as Plato did, that democracy would devolve into tyranny. Public opinion on democracy has shifted vastly since they were alive, with the franchise being expanded to the poor, to women and to ethnic minorities. Although we largely agree that there should be no disqualification based on those categories, there may be value in restricting the political power of the masses. An advantage of the Electoral College is that it enables the small group of electors to make important decisions, informed by knowledge that the general population do not have.
I believe that the current system for electing American presidents is fit for purpose as it recognises the United States’ unique status as a political invention, rather than a nation. The Electoral College respects the distinct differences between states that predate the writing of the Constitution. It thus encourages candidates to appeal to various constituencies of voters, and therefore protects the interests of minorities from the threat of popular elections.
[1]The Electoral College is Even More Biased Than You Think, Darling-Hammond, 2017:
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/the-electoral-college-is-even-more-biased-than-you-think-heres-how-democrats-can-beat-it/
[2]Trump Is President Because White People’s Votes Count More in America, Thornton, 2016:
https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/12/08/white-peoples-votes-are-worth-more-electoral-college-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-alt-right/
[3] In eight years in office, Cuomo still has not visited a few NY counties, and 10 only once, Spector and Esposito, 2017
https://eu.lohud.com/story/news/politics/politics-on-the-hudson/2019/02/07/eight-years-office-cuomo-still-hasnt-visited-few-ny-counties-and-10-only-once/2661086002/
[4] In Defense of the Electoral College, 2019: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/electoral-college-states-role-political-diversity/
[5] US Census Bureau: https://archive.vn/20200211181806/http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable#selection-3851.0-3854.0
[6] US Census Bureau: https://archive.vn/20200214060801/http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=PEP_2015_PEPASR6H&prodType=table
[7]American Community Survey: https://apps.mla.org/cgi-shl/docstudio/docs.pl?map_data_results
[8] SCOTUS Blog: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/chiafalo-v-washington/
[9] SCOTUS Blog: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/colorado-department-of-state-v-baca/
[10]John Adams to John Taylor, 1814: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6371
The system for electing American presidents is fit for purpose. For the President of the United States to be effective, he must unite the Union. We must recognise that the United States is different from other nations in that it is not a nation in the traditional sense, the American culture is not derivative of one ethnicity. America was not settled with ideas of national unification in mind and so national unity must be fought for. If the President does not unite the Union, the effects are dire. In 1860, Lincoln, despite winning the popular vote, won less than 3% of the Maryland vote, less than 1% of the Kentucky vote, and received no votes in the South. Predictably, the Civil War followed.
The primary area of concern with the Electoral College comes in its preference for voters who live in low-population states. In 2016, a Wyomingite had 268% more voting power than a Texan did, when electing the President.
Furthermore, some have argued that the defence of the Electoral College is motivated by desires to keep power in the hands of rural, white voters. In 2016, Patrick Thornton of Washingtonian, wrote a piece decrying the injustice that, due to the racial demographics of the largest states (where individual votes matter least), Hispanic votes counted for about 9/10 of white votes. In response to the commonly cited rural representation, he wrote that, “and… protecting rural interests, is already covered by the Senate.” However, if we recognise that geographical (and thus cultural) diversity matters, why shouldn’t this consideration extend to the executive branch as well? Until a supermajority of Americans live in megacities, it is incredibly important for Presidents to have the support of rural areas.
Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that popular votes discourage candidates from appealing to anyone outside of large population centres. Andrew Cuomo, Governor of New York, has governed the state since 2011, but has still not visited three of its counties: Chenango County, Fulton County and Livingston County. Another ten of its counties have received just one visit in the same period. The state’s use of a popular vote for gubernatorial elections has meant that Cuomo can afford to ignore small counties. In March 2019, the Editors at the National Review, a conservative magazine, wrote that, “But the Electoral College guarantees that candidates who seek the only nationally elected office in America must attempt to appeal to as broad a geographic constituency as possible — large states and small, populous and rural — rather than retreating to their preferred pockets and running up the score.”The Editors’ argument rests on the premise that states should be valued more than cities, regardless of population.
This argument is derived from a broader, federalist lens on America. Such an ideology recognises the need for national unity, while also respecting the different (and sometimes conflicting) customs of the states. The Editors would say that Americans are not only Americans, but citizens of their own states as well. The United States has been diverse from its inception; it is more a political union than a nation. The original thirteen colonies were all established at various times (from 1607 to 1732), under different monarchs (from James I to George II) and by different groups (religious minorities and the fleeing poor). The diversity of America is still present today. The twenty-two least populated states have about the same population as California. Yet those twenty-two states are far more various in their customs and identities than California. That list of twenty-two includes: traditionalist Mormon Utah, where more than 40% hail from the British Isles; Hawaii, the only state where Asian-Americans are a plurality; and New Mexico, where nearly 30% speak Spanish at home. Though diverse, California does not have the same number of distinct and thriving cultures. When we discuss uniting the nation, it is much more important to unite Hawaiians and Utahns than it is to unite the New York metropolitan area.
The second area of concern, although less addressed in mainstream politics, is the fact that the votes of the People can, in theory, be ignored. The November presidential election that we are familiar with is not the election from which the President is selected. The President is chosen by the Electoral College, a group of five hundred and thirty-eight electors. Although they pledge to vote in the same way the people have, there are currently two ongoing Supreme Court cases concerning whether electors have the right to vote against their state’s popular vote, Chiafalo v Washington , and Colorado Department of State v Baca.
I would argue that restricting elective powers to small groups is ideal. Only small groups are able to properly debate the merits and drawbacks of specific candidates, whereas, when the election is merely a popularity contest, the merits of a candidate, the majority of those voting, never have their views challenged. A brief survey of the Founding Fathers’ writings highlights their disdain for direct democracy. In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that, “There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”A strange mythos has evolved in the American psyche that the Founders were populists. They were a group of wealthy Englishmen, who intended to preserve the social order. They simply disliked George III.
The Founders did not trust the common man to make national policy. Perhaps informed having had their beliefs re-affirmed by the events of Shays’ Rebellion, they believed, as Plato did, that democracy would devolve into tyranny. Public opinion on democracy has shifted vastly since they were alive, with the franchise being expanded to the poor, to women and to ethnic minorities. Although we largely agree that there should be no disqualification based on those categories, there may be value in restricting the political power of the masses. An advantage of the Electoral College is that it enables the small group of electors to make important decisions, informed by knowledge that the general population do not have.
I believe that the current system for electing American presidents is fit for purpose as it recognises the United States’ unique status as a political invention, rather than a nation. The Electoral College respects the distinct differences between states that predate the writing of the Constitution. It thus encourages candidates to appeal to various constituencies of voters, and therefore protects the interests of minorities from the threat of popular elections.
[1]The Electoral College is Even More Biased Than You Think, Darling-Hammond, 2017:
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/the-electoral-college-is-even-more-biased-than-you-think-heres-how-democrats-can-beat-it/
[2]Trump Is President Because White People’s Votes Count More in America, Thornton, 2016:
https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/12/08/white-peoples-votes-are-worth-more-electoral-college-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-alt-right/
[3] In eight years in office, Cuomo still has not visited a few NY counties, and 10 only once, Spector and Esposito, 2017
https://eu.lohud.com/story/news/politics/politics-on-the-hudson/2019/02/07/eight-years-office-cuomo-still-hasnt-visited-few-ny-counties-and-10-only-once/2661086002/
[4] In Defense of the Electoral College, 2019: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/electoral-college-states-role-political-diversity/
[5] US Census Bureau: https://archive.vn/20200211181806/http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable#selection-3851.0-3854.0
[6] US Census Bureau: https://archive.vn/20200214060801/http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=PEP_2015_PEPASR6H&prodType=table
[7]American Community Survey: https://apps.mla.org/cgi-shl/docstudio/docs.pl?map_data_results
[8] SCOTUS Blog: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/chiafalo-v-washington/
[9] SCOTUS Blog: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/colorado-department-of-state-v-baca/
[10]John Adams to John Taylor, 1814: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6371
Comments
Post a Comment