Electoral Debacle: Why We Should Abolish the Electoral College System

• October 30, 2020
• Andrew Wiedenhofer

Presidential elections have always given me a certain level of angst because of the electoral process we utilize in this country. Old ways tend to die hard, but when something isn’t working true change is not only necessary, but required. The system we now call the Electoral College was agreed upon in 1787 and was, in many ways, the result of many layers of compromise. A handful of delegates in the Continental Congress wanted a system whereby Congress themselves would vote to elect the president every four years, but those opposed to this idea recognized how this would violate the separations of powers and the checks and balances of the three branches of government they had already established. Instead, it was proposed that independent electors be chosen by the states equal to the number of representatives in Congress. These electors would not hold public office and thus not be beholden to any presidential candidate.

When this system was established mail traveled at speeds measured by months, not days, and someone looking to travel from New York City to Boston could count on the journey taking no less than a week without stopping and possibly dying along the way. Only being able to exchange information this slowly meant something as important as a national election needed to be handled officially by states who would gather the will of the people through votes in November, validate a state’s choice for president as a whole in December, and deliver it safely and securely to Congress by January.

James Madison, who came to be known as the “Father of the Constitution”  acknowledged that even though a system based on popular vote would ultimately be ideal, it would be nearly impossible to get ratification because of the pervasiveness of slavery in the southern states. The Electoral College system was seen as a viable solution to the issue of efficiently electing a president at the time, but the Founding Fathers did not intend for it to be the prevailing system forever. Many delegates thought revolution, amendment, and revision of the constitution would be necessary. In a letter to a contemporary at the time, Founding Father Thomas Jefferson famously advised the need to “provide in our constitution for its revision at stated periods.”  He also warned of treating constitutions “with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched,”  a fact ironically lost on many constitutional zealots who are against any change because it "goes against what the Founding Fathers intended.”  Jefferson went on to suggest that these revisions should be carried out “every nineteen or twenty years… so that it may be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation, to the end of time.”

”Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment.“

(Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Samuel Kercheval: July 12, 1816)

A lot has obviously changed since 1787 but we still hold onto the Electoral College for presidential elections. Since the founding of the United States there have been more than seven-hundred proposed amendments to change or abolish the Electoral College with twenty-seven of them making their way through the amendment process and only two being ratified. The Twelfth Amendment changed the process by which the Electoral College voted for President and Vice-President and eliminated the possibility of the President and Vice-President being from opposing parties, which was rampant in the four elections preceding this change. The Twenty-Third Amendment gave citizens of the District of Columbia voting power in the presidential election. In 2004 (yes, you are reading that correctly) a bill was introduced by Illinois Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr. to provide for direct popular vote election of the President and Vice-President. A month after it was introduced in Congress it was sent to the Subcommittee on the Constitution where it has languished for more than sixteen years!

There is hope on the horizon though! Currently there is an initiative to bypass the need for congressional action and make election by popular vote possible through The National Popular Vote interstate compact. Under this agreement states would choose to award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. If enough states with a combined total of 270 electoral votes (or more) join the compact it will effectively create a popular vote system within the Electoral College system. This compact has bipartisan support and has been passed by fifteen states and the District of Columbia with a current combined total of 196 electoral votes, meaning it is more than 72% of the way to becoming activated.

It has already been approved in:

• California
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Delaware
• District of Columbia
• Hawaii
• Illinois
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• New Jersey
• New Mexico
• New York
• Oregon
• Rhode Island
• Vermont
• Washington

The compact has been partially approved in eleven other states but has not been fully signed into law. If we, as a nation, push this initiative in the remaining states we could make this a reality before 2024. If you are in a state that has not joined this important interstate compact you can go to www.nationalpopularvote.com/write to quickly and easily contact your legislators!