Baumann 1

Anna Baumann
Bruce C. Bordner
POSC 10W
June 3, 2016

The Problems with the Electoral College:

How it hinders the USA from Becoming a True Democracy

Since the founding of the United States of America in 1776, this country has

struggled to find a fair way to elect a president. Nominations work differently for the two

major political parties and primaries can be confusing, unclear processes. The general

election is often a tight race with unclear outcomes. Many Americans believe the

responsibility to elect a president rests with the people, but in reality it does not; the

Electoral College elects a president. The Electoral College in the United States has had

too much power since the founding of the country and does not always reflect the

popular vote. To make America a true democracy, the process of electing a president

needs to be revised.

Article II, Section I of the constitution outlines how a president was to be elected at

the founding of this country. While the Electoral College is not mentioned in the

constitution, the electors are and it is stated that these people will choose the president.

This section of the constitution also talks about the qualifications a president must have;

vice presidential succession; and when elections are held - namely, on the Tuesday after the

first Monday in November (Bardes, Shelley, and Schmidt, 2015, Ch. 2). This is still when

elections occur today. The basic process of how we elect a president in the general election

has not undergone a great change since the founding of this country.
 Baumann 2

The biggest change that has occurred to the procedure for electing presidents and

vice presidents is the ratification of the 12th amendment. This amendment provided for a

separate election of the President and Vice President so that ties in presidential races could

be kept to a minimum. Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr tied in 1800 due to the original

procedures of election. If there is a tie, the House of Representatives decides on the

president (they chose Jefferson in 1801), while the Senate chooses the Vice President

(Bardes, Shelley, and Schmidt, 2015, Ch. 12). One must remember that these procedures

were set up before the formation of strong political parties and no one imagined that, in the

future, such a polarized political climate would exist as we see today. The 12 th amendment

did not account for the fact that, when the House of Representatives needs to choose a

president now, it often turns into a fierce partisan debate.

While the general election process has remained mostly unchanged for over two

hundred years, the primary process of selecting presidential nominees has emerged from

the formation of strong political parties. This process has changed the strategy presidential

candidates use to get elected as well as the process as a whole. In modern times, the main

two parties are the Republican and the Democratic parties. They both take separate

approaches when it comes to choosing their primary candidate for president. The

Democratic Party always awards its candidates proportionally, meaning the percentage of

delegates a candidate receives is dependent on how many people in a state prefer this

candidate. The Republican Party uses both the proportional and the winner-takes-all

systems, in which one candidate receives all the delegates of a state (United States

Presidential Primaries, nd). These differences make primaries complex processes that are

hard to regulate.
 Baumann 3

There are also different types of primaries which state governments organize along

with the two main parties. The main ones are open or closed primaries and caucuses. In

closed primaries, only registered voters of a party may cast their candidate preferences. In

an open primary, anyone, including independents and members of a different party, can

vote for their favourite candidate. However, voters can only participate in one primary

unless a blanket primary is used (United States Presidential Primaries, nd.). This means

that citizens usually vote for in the primary of their own political party so they can

influence the presidential nominee chosen, even if the primary is open.

Caucuses, while less common now than they used to be, still occur. In a caucus, all

registered members of a party can attend and take an informal vote on their preferred

candidates following debates and speeches. Delegates are elected to represent the voters

preferences at the national convention of the party (United States Presidential Primaries,

nd). Finally, each party holds a national convention every four years, both to discuss party

business and to elect their nominee for president. The pledged delegates that were decided

on at the state primaries and caucuses cast their votes, alongside super delegates in the

Democratic Party, such as party officials, who may vote for whomever they choose (Bardes,

Shelley, and Schmidt, 2015, Ch. 12). This is how both parties finally have their candidates,

who, along with any independent runners, will now participate in the general election for

president and be voted on in the Electoral College.

The Electoral College was founded in 1776, along with the founding of the country.

The Founding Fathers established the Electoral College so that the votes cast by qualified

citizens could be balanced with the vote of the Congress (Electoral College FAQ, nd). The

Founding Fathers saw the Electoral College as necessary to prevent a tyranny of the
 Baumann 4

majority (Miller, 2008). It was also to keep unworthy voters within such a majority from

having too much power.

The Electoral College works in a rather complicated way. Each state has as many

electors as they do representatives in Congress, including both the Senate and the House of

Representatives, ranging from three to fifty five. State party conventions nominate electors

in thirty-four states. In other states, the state partys central committee may nominate

electors. The framers intended electors to be distinguished citizens, who hold no other

offices (Edwards, Kimnach, and Minkema, 2004, Ch1). They never truly wanted everyone

(or even all white men) to have the right to vote, as the founders believed only intelligent

men with land had the right to influence their countries elections.

State legislatures elect electors. While this has been challenged many times, in cases

such as Bush v. Gore in 2000, the Supreme Court has kept its opinion that individual citizens

do not have the right to elect electors (Edwards, Kimnach, and Minkema, 2004, Ch1). Most

states use a winner-takes-all system in pledging their electors, following the popular vote of

the majority in each state. Electors then meet in their respective states to vote by ballot for

a Vice President and President. Congress, more specifically the president of the Senate (the

Vice President), then counts the votes. Under the constitution, while electors are

theoretically supposed to vote with the popular vote, electors can vote for whomever they

choose (Edwards, Kimnach, and Minkema, 2004, Ch1). This is problematic since most

citizens do not have true control over the choice of president.

That the electors are not bound by the popular vote is one of the main issues with

the Electoral College. The newspaper Aurora claimed in 1796 that electors should be

faithful agents of the will of the people (Edwards, Kimnach, and Minkema, 2004, Ch1).
 Baumann 5

However, faithless electors are a continuing phenomenon. The first faithless elector

incident occurred in Pennsylvania in 1796, when elector Samuel Miles was chosen as a

Federalist but voted for Thomas Jefferson. More recently, 8 electors have been unfaithful

with the most recent being Democrat Barbara Lett-Simmons in 2000, when she initially

refused to vote to protest the lack of representation from Washington DC. Al Gore later

received the 3 electoral votes from Washington DC when she signed a Certificate of Vote

(Edwards, Kimnach, and Minkema, 2004, Ch1). However, her refusal to allocate the votes

silenced 1000s of DC voters she claimed she was trying to help. While faithless electors are

not common and most consider themselves bound, legally, they can influence the outcome

of presidential elections in the United States in a decidedly undemocratic way.

The Electoral College makes America seem like an oligarchy. One study found that

the US government is now ruled by economic elites and special interest groups

representing business, as they have a substantial impact on US governmental policies.

Mass-based interest groups or citizens have much less impact, as do politicians because of

the various checks and balances in place (Gilens and Page, 2014). The truth is, a few people

now hold the power for all of the hundreds of millions of people living in the United States.

This system is reinforced by an electoral college, where the official leader of this country is

truly chosen by only 538 people.

The Electoral College also undermines the one citizen-one vote goal of the United

States. States with smaller populations have far more representatives per population in the

Electoral College than larger states due to the fact that all states get two Senate seats.

Wyoming, for example, has one congressional representative for every 177,556 people

while Texas only has one per 715,499 people (Problems with the Electoral College, nd).
 Baumann 6

This means that some peoples votes have more influence than others in the electoral

process. This directly undermines the proud America claim that everyone is equal, both

under the law and in exercising their rights to influence the electoral process.

While unequal representation is a large issue, this does not even take into account

the fact that 48 states allocate all their Electors to one candidate. Only Maine and Nebraska

currently use proportional representation. This means that swing-states, such as Florida,

where votes are relatively split, have more influence in choosing the president (Electoral

College, nd). This also means that swing states do not accurately represent the votes of

1000s if not millions of people in the Electoral College since, usually, almost half of the

votes were cast for the candidate which the electors from that state are not going to vote

for.

If people truly knew how little influence they had over the election of a president,

many may be discouraged from voting. This would be seen as a bad thing by the

government as they believe the people should exercise their right to vote. However, only a

small portion of votes that are cast actually end up being decisive in the allocation of

electors for each state. In 2000, 79.28% of votes did not matter in determining the winner.

In 2008, 70.39% of votes did not matter (Problems with the Electoral College, nd). This is

because only the votes cast for the winner in each state end up mattering and the fact that

not all votes (not even half) are needed in each state to win the Electoral College. Without

the Electoral College, every vote would truly count and more people may be inclined to go

out and vote.

The failures of the Electoral College can be seen in the 2000 presidential election.

Here, the president, George Bush, won the election without the popular vote of the majority
 Baumann 7

of ballots cast. This has happened a total of 16 times since the founding of this country

(Problems with the Electoral College, nd). Al Gore won by a large margin in big states,

with Gore winning California by 1.3 million and New York by 570,000 votes. However, he

lost many of the small states by extremely close margins. In the end, while Gore won

560,000 more votes than Bush, he still lost the election (Florig, nd). The truth of the matter

is that, while a majority of citizens did not want Bush elected, he was. This goes against

what a democracy is supposed to stand for.

The majority of US citizens want to abolish the Electoral College. This is indicated in

Gallup poles ranging from 1944 to 2004 (Goldman, 2012). Yet not much had been done to

see the Electoral College eradicated until the formation of the National Popular Vote. This is

a campaign that started in the mid-2000s and seeks to get states to award their electoral

votes to winners of the national popular vote. This is being done because overturning the

Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment that would be all but

guaranteed to fail to pass in Congress (Blake, 2013). So far, 11 jurisdictions possessing 165

electoral votes have signed on, including California. This is 61% of the 270 electoral votes

necessary to activate this plan and render the Electoral College useless (National Popular

Vote, nd). If more states sign on and the goal of 270 electoral votes is met, the process of

electing a president will become more democratic. The elected president would always be

the one the majority of citizens in the United States voted for, as it should be.

The Electoral College is undemocratic. It is wrought with issues such as unbound

delegates; unequal voter representation; winner-take-all states; two party system ideals;

and useless votes of citizens. Reform of the system is needed to make The United States of
 Baumann 8

America a truly democratic country. One way this could be achieved is if the National

Popular Vote is applied after enough states sign on.

Works Cited

Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote. (2016). National

Popular Vote. http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation (Accessed May

30, 2016).

Bardes, Barbara A., Shelley II, Mack C., & Schmidt, Steffen W. (2015). American

Government and Politics Today. USA: Cengage Learning.

Blake, Aaron. (July 25, 2013). The National Popular Vote effort, explained. The Washington

Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/07/25/the-national-

popular-vote-effort-explained/ (Accessed May 28, 2016).

Edwards, George C., Kimnach, Wilson H., Minkema, Kenneth P. (December 2004). Why the

Electoral College is Bad for America. New Haven, USA: Yale University Press.

Accessed from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ucr/detail.action?docID=10167885.

Florig, Dennis. nd. The Electoral College and the 2000 Election. The Electronic Textbook on

American Politics and International Studies. http://dflorig.com/electrotext.htm (Accessed

May 30, 2016).

Gilens, Martin., Page, Benjamin I. (September 2014). Testing Theories of American Politics:

Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics Vol. 12/No 3:

American Politics Science Association 2014.

Goldman, Corrie. (August 20, 2012). Why do we still let the Electoral College pick our

president? Stanford News. https://news.stanford.edu/2012/08/20/rakove-electoral-college-

082012/ (Accessed May 28, 2016).

 Baumann 9

Government 101: The United States Presidential Primary. nd. Vote Smart.

https://votesmart.org/education/presidential-primary#.V1EMppMrLq1 (Accessed May

28, 2016).

Miller, Joe. (February 11, 2008). The Reason for the Electoral College. Fact Check.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-the-electoral-college/ (Accessed June 1,

2016).

Problems With the Electoral College. nd. Fair Vote.

http://www.fairvote.org/problems_with_the_electoral_college (Accessed May 29, 2016).

The Electoral College. nd. Fair Vote.

http://www.fairvote.org/the_electoral_college#how_the_electoral_college_works_today

(Accessed June 1, 2016).

US Electoral College: Frequently Asked Questions, nd., National Archives and Records

Administration, http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-

college/faq.html#whyec (Accessed May 28, 2016).