Electoral College: Essential to Our Governmental System

A friend of mine asked me to write about the Electoral College. Of the many items I wish to write about this is actually one of those topics on my list. A few years ago as I moved out west, I had a conversation with one of my Aunts discussing the importance of the Electoral College. She had never though about the purpose behind the college and was appreciative of my explanation. I hope you are too.

As usual, I've researched this topic to expand my knowledge of the process and the reason behind the process. I don't remember being taught about the Electoral College specifics during any class while in high school or in my US History college class. This does not mean I wasn't taught the subject; it does mean, though, that the emphasize placed upon the topic, if taught, was not significant enough to be retained by my memory cells.

Every election year, one group or another proposes ending the Electoral College system of electing the President and the Vice President. One of those is a bastion of liberty ideals, one Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who in 2004 proposed an end to the "out-dated" system of electing the heads of the Executive Branch of our Federal Government. The problem these people have with the system is that the populous does not actually vote for the President and the Vice President of the United States. (If you thought you did, I'm sorry but you do not.)

Under the Electoral College, on November 4 of the every 4th year election year, when the citizens of the Country vote for President and Vice President, they are actually voting for the electors of their state. The electors then in December will cast their vote for President and Vice President. Only the electors actually vote for a President and a Vice President; the citizens do not. Thus when you look at our system, the citizens of a state vote for the electors who will represent them in the vote for the President and the Vice President. Thus a majority of a state's voters will decide the allocation of a state's electors. The majority of state's then decide who are the President and the Vice President.

There are pros and cons to both sides of the issue. (I will include several links at the end of my blog for your leisurely review. The most informative link will be the pdf file from a FEC administrator.) One of the loudest arguments against the system is that a person could win the Presidency without a majority of the popular vote - which has occurred four times in our history: John Quincy Adams (1824), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), Benjamin Harrison (1888), and most recently, George W. Bush (2000) (Downey, pg E-96). This aspect is crucial to the system and my arguments. I will only discuss my thoughts on why the electoral college is important and why it should remain in place. I will admit up front, I believe the majority of those who wish to change the system are progressives who wish to destroy the US - see the link above, Sen. Feinstein is a liberal and a progressive.

My arguments for why the electoral college is important rely on the name of our Country and the substance found in Article II of the US Constitution. I do not rely on any of the arguments which state the populous is not informed enough to vote (although it might be biased in its vote). I do not believe in that aspect of the Electoral College. I hope to sway you to my side.

First, what is the name of our Country? Is it America? No. Although we are incorrectly, I believe, referred to as Americans, we do not belong to the Country of America. We belong to the United States of America. Our Country is actually, the United States. We each are citizens of our respective states which then belong to a union of said states to form our Country, the United States. Every four years, the country gets together to elect a President who represents the UNITED STATES. This is the key to the argument. The President does not represent the citizens of the country; instead, the President represents the union of the States. Thus the President (and the Vice President) should be elected by a majority of the States and not by a majority of the citizens. This is what the electoral college accomplishes.

As already stated, the majority of the populous could vote for a single person who actually will not become President. The essence of the electoral college ensures that the most populous states do not then elect the President and the Vice President. For example, Texas, California, and New York account for 26% of the total population of the country. This means that 1/16th of the total number of states has 1/4th of the population of the country. If you add in the next 6 states for a total of 9 states, the percent of the total population reaches 51%. This means that if those 9 states ALL voted for the same candidate and the rest of the country voted for the opposite candidate, 1/10th of the states would choose the President. (Granted this argument relies on the fact that the approximate number of voters in each state is directly related to the total number of people in that state and that everyone of the voters in each state votes the same. Realize, this is for the argument.) However, by the electoral college method, those nine states would amass only 241 electoral college votes which is an insufficient number (270 is needed) for President. Instead, the other 41 states (plus DC) would have chosen the President. Again, the President is the President of the United States; not the President of the people of the United States.

(It should be noted, that if two more states all do the same as the nine states above, the President would be decided by 11 of 50 states. However, in the reality of the situation, most states seem to be united by different factors. For example, the South has usually been referred to the "Bible Belt" and tend to vote Republicans. The West and the Northeast tend to be more liberal and usually votes Democratic. When you look at the populous of Florida, it is 50/50 with respect to ideology between the two parties. Thus their vote can sway from one party to another as evidenced by their vote for Republicans in 2000 and for Democrats in 2008. The Electoral College allows the little States to join together to have their voice heard in the election of the President vice having the larger States always dominating the election results.)

Second, we look to the Constitution. Section 2 and 3 of Article II list the duties and responsibilities of the President. One of those responsibilities is the power to make treaties with other nations. Another the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army and the Navy of the United States. The President appoints Ambassadors and Judges. Every appointment is for the benefit of the United States. Each of the duties and responsibilities in some way benefits the country as a whole. Additionally, the President is the person who is selected to interact with other countries.

Some might argue these also benefit the citizens as much as they do the states. However, the benefit bestowed on the states is more substantial to the union than any benefit which may or may not be bestowed on the citizens. Think of bestowing benefits on a company. The company benefits more than the individual employees of the company. The President represents the States to the world for benefit to the States which will then be indirectly beneficial to the people.

We stand alone in the world with this form of election. However, we stand alone in many aspects of our government. Is this necessarily a bad thing? I think not. Argentina elects their leader by popular vote. Russia elects their leader by popular vote. Iran elects their leader by popular vote. They are "democracies." We are a Republic. China elects their leader by a selection process which relies on a lower level of bureaucracy to elect the members of the next higher bureaucracy until you have an overall leader. It would be the same as if the Congress elected the President (one of the original proposals for election of the President). Which would you prefer, our system or the system of any of the countries mentioned?

I will offer a disadvantage to the system which is near and dear to my heart: political parties. I am disenfranchised with the ideologies of the two big political parties. The Electoral College maintains the two-party system making it difficult, actually out-right impossible, for a third political party to win the Presidency. However, the need for the voice for the President to be the States vice the populous overrides this disadvantage in my opinion.

We are the United States. As such, we elect our leader by ensuring that the individual states have a say in the leader vice a majority of the population. The Electoral College is essential to our Republic form of government and should continue to exist....

Mike

References not linked above:

Downey, D. (Ed.). (1987). New Standard Encyclopedia. IL: Standard educational corporation.

Kimberling, William. (1992). The electoral college. Retrieved 12 Aug 2010 from http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf (This is a well written dissertation on the Electoral College!)

National Archives and Records Administration website: http://archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/index.html

Wikipedia for how nations mentioned elected their leaders.

US Census Bureau for population numbers: http://www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-ann-est.html

US Constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/