Background
During American presidential elections, news coverage focuses on the “270 to win” count rather than the actual majority of individual votes that candidates receive. This is due to the fact that presidential elections are decided by a system called the Electoral College, in which a candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. The Electoral College is outlined in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution. It was devised by the Framers in 1787 as a compromise between competing visions for electing the president—rather than a direct popular vote, electors from each state would meet to choose the president. These electors are selected anew for each election and represent their respective states or the District of Columbia.
In the late 18th century, the United States consisted of 13 states. Delegates at the Constitutional Convention struggled with how to balance the power of larger states with that of smaller ones. They sought a system that would prevent domination by states with larger populations. Thus, the Electoral College’s apportionment is based on the total state population, not the number of eligible voters. This approach also granted white voters in the South greater influence because enslaved people counted as a part of the total state population despite the fact that they could not vote. Initially, the College was envisioned as independent, empowered to choose winners based on merit. Few delegates had faith in citizens’ ability to make the ‘right’ selections directly but believed they could competently choose electors capable of making informed decisions.
The Electoral College differs significantly from a direct popular vote for three reasons. The most drastic difference is in the form of the “Plus Two” effect. Each state is allocated electors based on the number of Representatives sent to the House of Representatives, plus the number of Senators sent to the Senate. Every state has two Senators, and Representatives vary by state population The impact of these additional votes varies greatly between populous states like California (53 Representatives) and smaller states like Wyoming (1 Representative). Secondly, all states and the District of Columbia (except for Maine and Nebraska) follow a winner-takes-all approach, in which the candidate who wins the majority of votes in a state receives all its electoral votes no matter how small said majority is. Lastly, U.S. territories are not eligible to send electors to the Electoral College.
The question central to this debate today is whether or not the Electoral College is outdated or still necessary. Public opinion is not in favor of the College: in September 2023, 65% of U.S. adults favored its abolishment. This may be because five presidents won the Electoral College and lost the popular vote, including two in the past 25 years. Two reforms attempt to mitigate issues with the winner-takes-all effect and the somewhat frequent discrepancy between the popular vote and the electoral vote. The first is the district system, which allocates electoral votes based on congressional districts, potentially reducing the winner-takes-all impact. The second is the National Popular Vote Compact (NPVC), where states commit to awarding their electors to the national popular vote winner. However, this compact has only been adopted by 16 states and D.C.
Arguments in Favor of the Electoral College
The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are represented in presidential elections, especially rural areas that might otherwise be overshadowed by cities. In addition, the Electoral College safeguards against the tyranny of the majority—supporters believe the Electoral College provides a clear, secure process, reducing potential questions about a national vote count and its accuracy and encourages broad-based coalitions to promote more moderate political parties due to the need of presidential candidates to capture swing states.
Supporters point to the fact that the Electoral College was the reason for the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, even though he won less than 50% of the popular vote. Supporters also counter the idea that the Electoral College is outdated by citing past reforms that arguably made the system more responsive to the popular vote. In particular, the 12th Amendment instituted a joint ticket system for the election of the vice president and the president together (in place of the second-place presidential finisher becoming the vice president). In addition, state legislatures used to choose the electors but, by the end of the 1800s all states moved to allow voters choose the electors. These reforms are cited as evidence that the Electoral College can be altered to evolve with the times while still remaining an important institution. In addition, some proponents say that because replacing the Electoral College with a different system would require a Constitutional amendment, it is too lofty of a goal, and that we should instead work on improving it when needed.
Arguments Against the Electoral College
A common argument against the Electoral College is that its design reflects compromises between slaveholding states and non-slaveholding states, tainting the legitimacy of the system. Today, there is evidence that Black people in the South hold less voting power in the winner-take-all system because they are overpowered by white voters in their states. Critics also argue that the winner-take-all system makes elections unfairly rely on swing states and unequally spread votes. Furthermore, electors are not constitutionally obligated to vote for the person who won their state, although “faithless electors” are incredibly rare. Some also say that due to how nationalized politics have become in the 21st century, factoring state perspectives into the national political system is less important than it once was and thus no longer a valid argument for the Electoral College’s existence. One final argument by opponents of the College is that proposed reforms (such as the district system) will not solve the problem of how smaller states benefit from the “plus two” effect in the apportionment of votes.
Recent DevelopmentsThe 2022 Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act, signed into law the year after the January 6th, 2021 attack, states that the Vice President’s role during Congress’s Electoral vote count will be primarily administrative rather than political. In addition, objections to the count by members of Congress must now be supported by at least one-fifth of both the House and Senate’s members. This act, intended to safeguard Congressional authority over the procedures of the Electoral College, will soon be put to the test. During the 2024 election cycle and those in the future, the American public and politicians must decide whether the Electoral College is needed to provide balance to the presidential election system and give smaller states a voice, or if it is an outdated element of the Constitution that reflects a different time in U.S. history.