Originally published at: An Unseen Problem With The Electoral College: It Tells Bad Guys Where To Target Their Efforts
This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation. Over the past four years, Congress and state governments have worked hard to prevent the aftermath of the 2024 election from descending into the chaos and threats to democracy that occurred around the 2020 U.S. presidential…
Maine and Nebraska use the Congressional District method of allocating electoral votes. That, combined with ranked choice, could be another method that avoids amending the Constitution. I wonder if Congress could require it nationwide or if it had to be done state by state as it is now? (Of course, after expanding the House to better represent populous states — right now, someone in Wyoming has something like 66x my political power in California.)
5 Likes
I was also thinking that awarding electors on the basis of votes cast would be a relatively easy way to fix the problem. While states with few electors will end up with some skew. Two of Vermont’s 3 electors would be given to the candidate who won 51% of the vote. But in 2020, where Trump got 51% of the vote in Florida, he’d had gotten 16 of Florida’s 30 electors and Biden 14.
There are better vote methods than first-past-the-post, but the deep unfairness of the electoral college would be mitigated if candidates winning a substantial share of the vote in a state got a proportional share of that state’s electors.
4 Likes
Vermont has 2.5 times as many electors/voter as California does, so I’d imagine Wyoming in under 3x California. Still massively unfair, but a hell of a lot less than 66X.
I once did a calculation about representational power and that’s what I got. The Senate is monumentally unfair in the way it allocates power. I think it should be retired like the House of Lords, but alas, the Constitution does not allow amending the Constitution to modify it.
3 Likes
A majority of Americans say in surveys they prefer to scrap the Electoral College system and simply award the presidency to the person who gets the most votes nationwide.
That would take a Constitutional Amendment. Not going to happen. If the election were decided by popular vote the 21st Century Republican Party would never win a Presidential election.
Mind you they could solve the problem by booting out the MAGA extremist who have taken over, but we know when that will happen.
2 Likes
The Electoral College is a disaster.
Like slavery, it was there from the start, also the result of the minority blackmailing the majority.
It’ll take a Constitutional amendment to dump this turd, but (hopefully!) not a war, as slavery required – and therein lies the conundrum. I fear we’ve seen our last Constitutional amendment, and for the very same reason the EC’s so flawed.
Rural, sparsely populated states not only have freakishly perverse advantages in the EC, they also have them in the Constitutional amendment process, so the very reason that drives EC reform is the one that prevents it.
And good luck ever enforcing the Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Last I checked (and I concede this might’ve changed since then):
- Not a single red state had adopted it.
- There weren’t enough votes from remaining blue states for an EC majority.
- It’s likely to require Congressional approval as an “interstate compact” under the Constitution (especially with the Roberts court).
- Even if enough red states joined to insure an EC majority, on what planet could we ever trust a red-state guv or lege to keep their promise if it meant reversing a GOP win? They’d pass whatever overnight emergency law (or pull whatever extra-judicial shenanigan) necessary to void reversing their state’s vote.
I fear we’re stuck with this turkey for the foreseeable future. Our best hope in the short term, it seems, is just beating the hell out of Republicans at the ballot box, so we never elect another minority prez – like the five we already have – even with this craptastic EC in place.
8 Likes
Ah, the House of thr Generationally Wealthy. What an abomination. Houses the son of a Russian oligarch with ties to Putin, thanks to Boris Johnson.
1 Like
You’re right with respect to the electoral college — a person from Wyoming has 4x my electoral say. However, in governing, they have one Senator per 290k people, whereas we have 20M per Senator. And we should have 80 House members rather than 52. The 1929 limitation needs to be repealed.
6 Likes
The fix for the Electoral College, National Popular Vote, is obvious but hasn’t gotten enough traction. Five of our 46 Presidents lost their elections and went to the White House anyway, including both George W. Bush and Trump.
1 Like
The Permanent Appointment Act of 1929 broke the intentional constitutional balance between the two Houses of congress and in effect also broke the EC.
Its arguably an unconstitutional law.
In order to not give large states all the power… the upper chamber treats all states equally, Wyoming’s 500k and California’s 40 million.
In order to no give small states too much power the House was apportioned to be representative relative to population.
Tha Apportionment Act breaks the intended ratio by capping the number of sears but leaving in place the minimum number of seats each state gets.
This also biases the EC toward small states as a result.
Any fair system would base the number of House seats on the total US population divided by the population of the smallest “at-large” district
Today…
US population = 336 Million
Wyoming = 580k
US House should have 672 (not 435) seats.
Wyoming would still get 3 EV’s, California woulf be closer to 80 (rather than 55)
This is how we mitigate the damage of the EC w/o constitutional amendment
5 Likes
Every time I see how the electoral college continues to reward the planter class 230 years later, and every time I read about how the states are the true institutions of democracy, I realize that Jim Crow laws were not just weapons to use against Black people. They work against anyone who isn’t “us.”
3 Likes
Yes. There may be an argument for having one house of Congress be based on states, like the senate (but I’m not going to make that argument). The problem is that our system is skewed to give more power to small states in the house and the presidency, as well. This is what gives the RW nuts so much power. If only the senate was skewed to small states, we’d have had Democratic presidents continually or the GOP would have to have remained more moderate in order to win.
A number of the issues with the house are basically rules one can change, like the Hastert rule, which allows the speaker to only bring legislation to the floor for a vote if the majority of the majority approve it, meaning something that has the support of 74% of the house can be effectively vetoed.
2 Likes
Thank you. This has driven me mad with fury for aeons. The House needs to be expanded ASAP, DC and PR need to be made states, and the Supremes given very clear definitions of enforceable guidelines of what constitutes “good behavior” as well as term limits. And so much more.
4 Likes
And…since this is a national election…state’s should not be able to dictate how the electors are allotted. I’m sure it’s in the freaking constitution so we can’t easily change it? Pisses me off.
1 Like
I had forgotten this. YEAH. let’s repeal this damn Act. One of the two dismal failures from 1929 that nearly destroyed our country.
2 Likes
None of this requires any more than a majority in both houses + presidency.
No constitutional amendments needed.
I’d even be ok to pass the law change and let it all slide now until the 2030 census. Retiring the 435 seat cap and having 2032 be the first official election under new rule.
It’d be very important this law change include 100% federal pre-clearance on every house seat to conttol for racial and partisan gerrymandering.
2 Likes
Yep! Eyeing the possible. Like passing the ERA by virtue of simply repealing the time limitation for ratification, which is not part of the actual amendment and thus can be removed. Like making no-excuse mail in voting universal, along with automatic voter registration. Like eliminating gerrymandering. So many good things can be done with a courageous trifecta. This is why we pour the big bucks into the Dems and work our tails off/fingers to the bone for them.
1 Like
That is a very good point. Wyoming republicans tout the EC as leveling the playing field. But they already have that in the Senate. Me -6th generation Wyomingite.
1 Like
So what? The decision of bewigged white dudes nearly 250 years ago should not bind us today. The damn Constitution wasn’t handed down by God on stone tablets, FFS.
1 Like