Electoral College Why did we do this? Why do we still have it? What political interests are preserved via Electoral College So, you want to be an Elector?

Electoral College

• Why did we do this?• Why do we still have it?• What political interests are preserved

via Electoral College

• So, you want to be an Elector?

Electoral College

• What is it– Constitutional compromise– Indirect election of President

– Electing a group of people to select Head of Government

Electoral College

• Brief History• 1789, no such thing as national

elections– Few people with national visibility– No national media / communication– Impossible to conduct national campaign– No party system

• many potential candidates

Electoral College

• History– 1789, not clear what the role of the President

would be• An extension of Congress• A Prime Minister• No Big Deal, and they knew GW would be it

– Solution:• Each state’s legislature pick group of people to

decide who to support

Electoral College

• Founder’s ‘solution’• Article 2.1

– each state shall appoint, in a Manner as the Legislature therof may direct, an Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Represenatives

– Meet in their state, cast votes for two people, send votes to US Senate

Electoral College

• Founders’ solution– Person with most votes is President,

person with 2nd most votes is VP– If a tie, Congress decides

– Didn’t think that President and Vice President might be enemies

Electoral College

• Early Problems– States didn’t know what to do– How appoint electors?– 1789

• New York’s legislature couldn’t agree• States didn’t know how to keep VP candidate

(Adams) from having as many votes as Washington

Electoral College

• History / Problems– 1789 method of selection

• 5 states used legislature to appoint (NY)• MA appointed some by legislature, some by

legislature from list of top 2 candidates in each Cong. district

• NH 5 electors selected by voters statewide• VA 10 electors selected by voters in districts• 1789, 1792 ‘unanimous’ elections

Electoral College

• Problems– 1789 - 1800

• 6 of 12 states selected by popular vote• states often split EC delegation• Selection in 1789, 1796, 1800 not winner-take-

all• What might this cause?

Electoral College

• 1796 First ‘real’ contest• 4 well known candidates

– Adams (Fed), Pinckney (Fed), Jefferson (DR), Burr (DR)

– weak concept of party ‘running mate’– If top 2 tied, goes to Congress

Electoral College

• 1796 Results (140 voters, 70 to win )

– Adams (F) 35,726 (53%) 71 EC votes– Jefferson (D) 31,115 (47%) 69 EC votes– Pinckney (F) 59 EC

votes– Burr (D) 30 EC votes– Hamilton wanted Pinckney, got some SC

Electors to vote Jefferson / Pinkney

Electoral College

• Or, if this happened today:– President Romney– Vice President Biden

– President GW Bush– Vice President Kerry

Electoral College

• 1796– Adams (F) / Pinckney (F) 45 - 49– Jefferson (D) / Burr (D) 25 - 30– Jefferson (D) / S. Adams (D) 14 - 15– Adams (F) / Ellsworth (F) 11 – Jefferson (D) / Pinckney (F) 9 - 14– Jefferson (D) / Clinton (D) 6 - 7– Adams (F) / Jay (F) 5 – Adams (F) / Jefferson (D) 1 - 6

Electoral College

• 1800– an accidental tie– Result

• Jefferson (DR) 41,330 (61%) 73 EC• Burr (DR) 73 EC• Adams (F) 25,952 (39%) 65 EC• Pinckney (F) 64 EC• Jay (F) 1 EC

Electoral College

• 1800– Jefferson was supposed to be Dems top

choice, Burr # 2– Tie goes to House of Reps– ‘Lame Duck’ Federalists controlled– 16 state delegations, each w/ 1 vote

• need majority (9 votes)

Electoral College

• 1800– For one week, over 35 ballots, Jefferson

got just 8 votes– Hamilton told Federalists Jefferson less

worse than Burr– Federalists switch on 36th Ballot, Jefferson

wins

Electoral College

• 1804– Burr runs for Governor of NY

• Hamilton smears Burr

– Burr gets even.– Shoots Hamilton– Hamilton dead

Electoral College

• 1804• 12th Amendment

– Electors cast one vote for President– Separate vote for Vice President

– Still up to Congress to break ties

Electoral College

• Developments since 1800s– Popular voting more common post 1830– National political parties– Move toward ‘winner take all’ rules in many

states• only 2 left that divide up Electors (NE, ME)

Electoral College

• Poor Record?– 4 times populat vote winner different than

Electoral College:

• 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000• twice (1824, 1876) Congress has had to select

President…came close in 1968• 11 of 34 election had no popular vote majority

winner

Electoral College

• Current Issues– Deadlines– Apportionment– Faithless electors– Election failures

Electoral College

• How it works today– need 270 Electors to win– state delegation = number of members of

Congress– Each candidate files a slate of trusted

electors w/ Secretary of State– Electors pledged to support their candidate

Electoral College

• How it works today– States decide how many electors each

candidate gets after popular vote• nearly all states = winner take all

• Federal Law & Deadlines– Electors meet at Capitol, December 13th– Deadline for National Archives December

22nd– Congress certifies election January 6th

Electoral College

• Deadlines– created massive problem in 2000

• Florida recount, lawsuits taking weeks• December 13 deadline looming• Major factor forcing US Supreme Court to

intervene

Electoral College

• Apportionent• Not by population

– Senate seats skew influence of smallest states

• One EC vote in WY = 198,000 people• One EC vote in VT = 200,000 people• One EC vote in NY, CA IL, FL, TX = 600,000 people

Electoral College

• Apportionment• 20 smallest states have 30m people

– they get 80 EC votes (44 if by population)• AK, DE, DC, HI, ID, ME, MT, ND, NH, RI, SD, VT, WY…

NE, NM, WV, (Bold = 150%)

• NY+ NJ = 28m people– they get 46 EC votes

• CA = 36m people– it gets 55 EC votes

Electoral College

• Apportionment• A structural partisan advantage?• What are the politics of smallest states?

– Bush beat Gore by 13% in smallest states • GW Bush won 61 of 84 small state

electors in 2000

Electoral College

• Apportionment– if allocated by population, GOP candidates

win 20 fewer EC votes 2000 & 2004

– or, GOP candidates started w/ a built-in 20 EC vote head start given political geography

– Change after re-apportionment 2010

Electoral College

• Apportionment

• What are the reasons for over-representing small states in the EC– Today, what purpose is served?

Electoral College

• Faithless Electors– might be the least of our worries

– rare, typically protest votes

– can this be regulated?

Electoral College

• Election Failures

• What is the point of popular vote for a national office– aggregate national opinion, produce

outcome

Electoral College

• Election Failure– EC not good at producing a winner with

majority popular support• Manufactured majorities

– EC good at translating narrow popular vote wins into clear EC majorities

– Reagan 1980; Clinton’s 43 % in 1992

Electoral College

• Attempts at Reform– Constitutional Amendments

• after 1948, award electors proportionate to popular vote in state

– 64 Y in Senate, died in House• after 1968, Direct Election of President

– 338 votes in House, 51 in Senate

Electoral College

• Reform Proposals• Colorado 2004

– PR allocation inside state– why is this a dumb idea?

• California 2007– winner-take-all by congressional district– just as dumb?

2000 Pop EC vote by CD by PR Gore 48.4 % 266 (49 % ) 251 257 Bush 47.9 270 (51 %) 287 258 Nader 2.7 20 others 1.0 3

1996 Clinton 49.2 379 (70 %) 345 262 Dole 40.7 159 (30 %) 193 220 Perot 8.4 49 others 1.7 7

1992 Clinton 43.0 370 (69%) 324 232 Bush 37.5 168 (31 % ) 214 203 Perot 18.9 102

1980 Reagan 50.7 489 (91 %) 396 273 Carter 41.0 49 (9 %)142 221 Anderson 6.6 35 others 1.9 9

BOLD = MAJORITY

1976 Carter 50.1 297 (55 % ) 269 270 Ford 48.0 240 (45 % ) 269 258 others 1.8 10

1968 Nixon 43.2 301 (56 %) 289 231 Humphr 42.7 191 (35 %) 192 225 Wallace 13.5 46 (8 %) 57 79 others 0.6 2

1960 Kennedy 49.8 303 (56 %) 278 266 Nixon 49.5 219 (41%) 245 266 unaffil. 0.7 15 (3% ) 14 5

BOLD = MAJORITY

Electoral College

• Current Reform Proposals• Motivated by difficulty of amending US

Constitution– direct election obvious reform, but hardest

to achieve• State by state compact only other

option

Electoral College

• National Popular Vote Compact– States by state agreement to award state EC

votes to national pop. vote winner– In effect when approved by states w/ majority of

electors– Now law in states = to 132 electoral votes– 49% of 270

Electoral College

• How would direct election change campaigns?– Large states– Small states– Urban areas– Rural areas

Electoral College

• How would direct election change campaigns?Less emphasis on handfull of “battleground”

states– 2008 McCain + Obama visited few small

states (NM, NV, NH)• none of the 14 other smallest

Electoral College

Electoral College

• How would direct election change campaigns?Less emphasis on handfull of “battleground”

states– Obama + McCain ignored 4 of 5 largest

states (CA, NY, TX, IL)

Electoral College

• Direct election diffuse campaign – goal = plurality of votes

• What strategies– TV time cheap in small & rural states– Mobilize urban areas

• Who advantaged?

Electoral College

• How would NPV change role of third parties?

• What incentives to run?

• What effects on contests?– G. Wallace 1968; Nader 2000

Electoral College

• Popular vote:– Plurality winner vs. majority winner– Popular vote does not produce majority

winner

– NPV + IRV ?

Electoral College

• Who advantaged by status quo?– Small states

• Republicans (slightly)

– Battle ground states• Hogs, corn & wheat

– Already well protected in US Senate

Electoral College

• Who disadvantaged– Larger states

• Non competitive states– Citrus, vegetables

Electoral College

• Protects interests of “states”– Protected in Senate

• What are states?– what common interest of AK, HI, ND, VT,

etc....

Electoral College

• Legitimacy crisis?

• What if Gore wasn’t a gracious non-winner in 2000?

• What if GW Bush “lost” FL under suspicious circumstances, but won nationally by 500,000 votes?– how much legitimacy would GOP have granted

President Gore?

Electoral College

• Or:– Obama wins 2008 with results nearly

identical to Kerry vote in 2004 (but narrowly wins OH)• Narrow EC victory, lose NPV by 2%, 2,000,000

votes

– Given hostility in face of near landslide in ‘08, how would GOP have responded?

Electoral College

• Defense– It works

• Popular vote would still have plurality outcome• 1876, 1888 popular vote winner was wrong, EC

was correct

– Produces good presidents

Electoral College

• Defense– Prevents crisis when national vote w/

“margin of litigation”• keeps recounts to few states• What if NPV result a 200,000 margin (.001% of

130,000,000 votes cast)• Litigation in all 50 states for recounts

Electoral College

• Defense– Prevent a coup

– Death or incapacity of winner right before or right after election