Taming The Electoral College

This book examines the history and weaknesses of the electoral college and proposes reforms that could be made to our electoral process without a constitutional amendment.

A New Statesman Book of the Year “America’s greatest historian of democracy now offers an extraordinary history of the most bizarre aspect of our representative democracy—the electoral college...A brilliant contribution to a critical current debate.” —Lawrence Lessig, author of They Don’t Represent Us Every four years, millions of Americans wonder why they choose their presidents through an arcane institution that permits the loser of the popular vote to become president and narrows campaigns to swing states. Congress has tried on many occasions to alter or scuttle the Electoral College, and in this master class in American political history, a renowned Harvard professor explains its confounding persistence. After tracing the tangled origins of the Electoral College back to the Constitutional Convention, Alexander Keyssar outlines the constant stream of efforts since then to abolish or reform it. Why have they all failed? The complexity of the design and partisan one-upmanship have a lot to do with it, as do the difficulty of passing constitutional amendments and the South’s long history of restrictive voting laws. By revealing the reasons for past failures and showing how close we’ve come to abolishing the Electoral College, Keyssar offers encouragement to those hoping for change. “Conclusively demonstrates the absurdity of preserving an institution that has been so contentious throughout U.S. history and has not infrequently produced results that defied the popular will.” —Michael Kazin, The Nation “Rigorous and highly readable...shows how the electoral college has endured despite being reviled by statesmen from James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson to Edward Kennedy, Bob Dole, and Gerald Ford.” —Lawrence Douglas, Times Literary Supplement

Taming the Electoral College explores poorly understood aspects of the electoral college, including two possibilities in particular that could pose the most serious danger for American democracy. These are, first, determination of the president by "faithless electors" who ignore the popular vote in their states, and, second, choice of the president in the House of Representatives, which is required if no electoral college majority votes in favor of a single candidate. In any given election, neither of these outcomes is likely, but the 2000 election showed that we would do well to take both of them seriously and take action now to prevent them from occurring. Both possibilities could be dealt with by constitutional amendment, but amendment is difficult to achieve, particularly as it bears on the electoral college process. This engaging book instead offers nonconstitutional solutions to the two possibilities, as well as to a variety of other problems that lurk in the shadows of the electoral college process. It also offers a way to work toward popular election of the president without a constitutional amendment.

Is the Electoral College anti-democratic? Some would say yes. After all, the presidential candidate with the most popular votes has nevertheless lost the election at least three times, including 2016. To some Americans, that’s a scandal. They believe the Electoral College is an intolerable flaw in the Constitution, a relic of a bygone era that ought to have been purged long ago. But that would be a terrible mistake, warns Tara Ross in this vigorous defense of “the indispensable Electoral College.” Far from an obstacle to enlightened democracy, the Electoral College is one of the guardrails ensuring the stability of the American Republic. In this lively and instructive primer, Tara Ross explains: Why the Founders established the Electoral College—and why they thought it vital to the Constitution Why the Electoral College was meant to be more important than the popular vote How the Electoral College prevents political crises after tight elections Why the Electoral College doesn’t favor one party over the other Why the states are the driving force behind presidential elections and how efforts to centralize the process have led to divisiveness and discontent Why the Electoral College is inappropriately labeled a “relic of slavery” Every four years, the controversy is renewed: Should we keep the Electoral College? Tara Ross shows you why the answer should be a resounding Yes!

It’s a system that now fosters massive inequality in voting rights and opens the door to manipulation of presidential elections by foreign and domestic enemies of democracy. Electoral Bait & Switch is prescriptive, and accessible to the general reader.The current Electoral-Vote system presents a severe and growing threat to democracy in the United States. It has thwarted the will of a majority of the voters twice in the last five presidential elections (2000 and 2016) by elevating to office a candidate who received only a minority of the vote. This system is a distortion of the system envisioned by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and the other framers of the Constitution. If it is not challenged and overturned, we are likely to face a continual series of electoral and constitutional crises. The constitutional right of Americans to an equal vote in presidential elections is being violated by this system on a massive scale. The value of an individual vote varies as much as three-to-one from state to state, and there are no two states where voters have the same voting-power. The current Elector system discriminates heavily against minority and poorer voters. The winner-take-all method of allocating Electoral votes also results in large pockets of “useless votes” and a system in which where you vote counts for far more than how you vote. Most ominously, evidence is now clear that the Electoral-Vote system has opened the door for voter suppression and manipulation of elections by domestic and foreign conspirators.

Contents: (1) Intro.; (2) Competing Approaches: Direct Popular Election v. Electoral College Reform; (3) Direct Popular Election: Pro and Con; (4) Electoral College Reform: Pro and Con; (5) Electoral College Amendments Proposed in the 111th Congress; (6) Contemporary Activity in the States; (7) 2004: Colorado Amendment 36; (8) 2007-2008: The Presidential Reform Act (California Counts); (9) 2006-Present: National Popular Vote -- Direct Popular Election Through an Interstate Compact; Origins; The Plan; National Popular Vote, Inc.; Action in the State Legislatures; States That Have Approved NPV; National Popular Vote; (10) Prospects for Change -- An Analysis; (11) State Action -- A Viable Reform Alternative?; (12) Concluding Observations.

The Electoral College that governs America has been with us since 1804, when Thomas Jefferson's supporters redesigned it for his re-election. The Jeffersonians were motivated by the principle of majority rule. Gone were the days when a president would be elected by acclamation, as George Washington had been. Instead, given the emergence of intense two-party competition, the Jeffersonians wanted to make sure that the Electoral College awarded the presidency to the candidate of the majority, rather than minority, party. They also envisioned that a candidate would win by amassing a majority of Electoral College votes secured from states where the candidate's party was in the majority. For most of American history, this system has worked as intended, producing presidents who won Electoral College victories derived from state-based majorities. In the last quarter-century, however, there have been three significant aberrations from the Jeffersonian design: 1992, 2000, and 2016. In each of these years, the Electoral College victory depended on states where the winner received only a minority of votes. In this authoritative history of the American Electoral College system, Edward Foley analyzes the consequences of the unparalleled departure from the Jeffersonians' original intent-and delineates what we can do about it. He explains how states, by simply changing their Electoral College procedures, could restore the original Jeffersonian commitment to majority rule. There are various ways to do this, all of which comply with the Constitution. If only a few states had done so before 2016, the outcome might have been different. Doing so before future elections can prevent another victory that, contrary to the original Jeffersonian intent, a majority of voters did not want.

The 2016 election caused many pundits and citizens alike to decry the Electoral College. This book explains the dangerous and unconstitutional implications of the National Popular Vote Bill, which is quietly passing in state houses across the nation. Ever since the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College, Congress has tried to overturn it. The latest attempt is taking place not in Congress, but in state legislatures around the country, where a well-financed campaign by a private California group calling itself "National Popular Vote" (NPV) is proposing an "interstate compact" to circumvent the process for amending the U.S. Constitution. If adopted by states representing a majority of electoral votes, the signatory states would bind themselves to ignore the popular votes within their respective states, and instead allocate their electoral votes to the candidate whom the media proclaimed to be the "national popular vote" winner. In this new history of the Electoral College, law professor Robert M. Hardaway lays bare the constitutional loopholes that have allowed this movement to succeed in states representing approximately half the electoral votes necessary to purportedly bind those states to ignore the popular vote of the people within their respective states. The presentation of the information in this book to state legislatures considering the compact, resulted in complete reversal of preconceived perceptions about how presidential elections should be conducted.

“Wegman combines in-depth historical analysis and insight into contemporary politics to present a cogent argument that the Electoral College violates America’s ‘core democratic principles’ and should be done away with..." —Publishers Weekly The framers of the Constitution battled over it. Lawmakers have tried to amend or abolish it more than 700 times. To this day, millions of voters, and even members of Congress, misunderstand how it works. It deepens our national divide and distorts the core democratic principles of political equality and majority rule. How can we tolerate the Electoral College when every vote does not count the same, and the candidate who gets the most votes can lose? Twice in the last five elections, the Electoral College has overridden the popular vote, calling the integrity of the entire system into question—and creating a false picture of a country divided into bright red and blue blocks when in fact we are purple from coast to coast. Even when the popular-vote winner becomes president, tens of millions of Americans—Republicans and Democrats alike—find that their votes didn't matter. And, with statewide winner-take-all rules, only a handful of battleground states ultimately decide who will become president. Now, as political passions reach a boiling point at the dawn of the 2020 race, the message from the American people is clear: The way we vote for the only official whose job it is to represent all Americans is neither fair nor just. Major reform is needed—now. Isn't it time to let the people pick the president? In this thoroughly researched and engaging call to arms, Supreme Court journalist and New York Times editorial board member Jesse Wegman draws upon the history of the founding era, as well as information gleaned from campaign managers, field directors, and other officials from twenty-first-century Democratic and Republican presidential campaigns, to make a powerful case for abolishing the antiquated and antidemocratic Electoral College. In Let the People Pick the President he shows how we can at long last make every vote in the United States count—and restore belief in our democratic system.