electoral college
DESCRIPTION
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 - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
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?
![Page 2: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Electoral College
• What is it– Constitutional compromise– Indirect election of President
– Electing a group of people to select Head of Government
![Page 3: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
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
![Page 4: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
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
![Page 5: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
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
![Page 6: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
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
![Page 7: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
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
![Page 8: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
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
![Page 9: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
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?
![Page 10: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
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
![Page 11: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
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
![Page 12: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Electoral College
• Or, if this happened today:– President Romney– Vice President Biden
– President GW Bush– Vice President Kerry
![Page 13: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
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
![Page 14: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
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
![Page 15: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
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)
![Page 16: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
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
![Page 17: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Electoral College
• 1804– Burr runs for Governor of NY
• Hamilton smears Burr– Burr gets even.– Shoots Hamilton– Hamilton dead
![Page 18: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Electoral College
• 1804• 12th Amendment
– Electors cast one vote for President– Separate vote for Vice President
– Still up to Congress to break ties
![Page 19: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
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)
![Page 20: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
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
![Page 21: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Electoral College
• Current Issues– Deadlines– Apportionment– Faithless electors– Election failures
![Page 22: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
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
![Page 23: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
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
![Page 24: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
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
![Page 25: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
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
![Page 26: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
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
![Page 27: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
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
![Page 28: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
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
![Page 29: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Electoral College
• Apportionment
• What are the reasons for over-representing small states in the EC– Today, what purpose is served?
![Page 30: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Electoral College
• Faithless Electors– might be the least of our worries
– rare, typically protest votes
– can this be regulated?
![Page 31: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Electoral College
• Election Failures
• What is the point of popular vote for a national office– aggregate national opinion, produce
outcome
![Page 32: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
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
![Page 33: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
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
![Page 34: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
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?
![Page 35: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
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
![Page 36: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
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
![Page 37: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
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
![Page 38: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
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
![Page 39: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Electoral College
• How would direct election change campaigns?– Large states– Small states– Urban areas– Rural areas
![Page 40: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
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
![Page 41: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Electoral College
![Page 42: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
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)
![Page 43: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Electoral College
• Direct election diffuse campaign – goal = plurality of votes
• What strategies– TV time cheap in small & rural states– Mobilize urban areas
• Who advantaged?
![Page 44: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Electoral College
• How would NPV change role of third parties?
• What incentives to run?
• What effects on contests?– G. Wallace 1968; Nader 2000
![Page 45: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Electoral College
• Popular vote:– Plurality winner vs. majority winner– Popular vote does not produce majority
winner
– NPV + IRV ?
![Page 46: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Electoral College
• Who advantaged by status quo?– Small states
• Republicans (slightly)
– Battle ground states• Hogs, corn & wheat
– Already well protected in US Senate
![Page 47: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Electoral College
• Who disadvantaged– Larger states
• Non competitive states– Citrus, vegetables
![Page 48: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Electoral College
• Protects interests of “states”– Protected in Senate
• What are states?– what common interest of AK, HI, ND, VT,
etc....
![Page 49: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
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?
![Page 50: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
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?
![Page 51: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
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
![Page 52: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
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
![Page 53: Electoral College](https://reader033.vdocuments.mx/reader033/viewer/2022051421/568161ce550346895dd1bbfe/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Electoral College
• Defense– Prevent a coup
– Death or incapacity of winner right before or right after election