The Official Celebrate/Cry About Who The Next President Is Thread

[A Black Falcon]

I know, I know, the Electoral College has advantages, and prime among them is enfranchising the smaller states with a greater say. And there is definitely a good argument to be made for both sides. But I think that we would be better off in the long run with a system where the winner is the one with the most votes...

# Electoral College vs. Popular Vote - One of the most blatantly obvious reforms that may be discussed would be to replace the "outdated" Electoral College with a popular vote. While a popular vote would be more democratic, there are two major advantages to the electoral college. First, since the popular vote itself was so close, and voter irregularities like Florida's were reported in practically every other state, we would be dealing right now with lawsuits across the country, not just Florida. Second, there is wisdom in letting the individual states decide the next president. A popular vote would federalize the election, taking the election away from the states. The rural states would essentially be disenfranchised by the urban states. The Electoral College system is one of the checks and balances put in to the Constitution to guarantee that the Federal Government will always be dependent on the state legislatures. Madison wrote:
The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization of the former. Without the intervention of the State legislatures, the President of the United States cannot be elected at all. They must in all cases have a great share in his appointment, and will, perhaps, in most cases, of themselves determine it. (Federalist 45 paragraph 7)

This quote has been getting a lot of attention lately in that it essentially means that the Florida Legislature can indeed vote for electors regardless of the outcome of the lawsuits. But, it also puts a good argument forward in keeping the Electoral College. I would like to see the Electoral College stay but with some changes. Two states, Nebraska and Maine, have a system in place in awarding electors more fairly. The winner of the whole state would get two electoral votes, then the winner in each congressional district would get an additional electoral vote. This reform would not require a Constitutional Amendment to implement, just a law passed in each of the states with more than 3 electoral votes available. And it would be to the States advantage to do so. Candidates do not go to states they have no chance of winning. All 54 electoral votes in California went to Gore, but if this program were in place, 15 or 16 of those votes would have gone to Bush. Gore could have made up the difference in other states like Arizona with 8 votes that went to Bush, but at least two votes would have gone to Gore under this system. Florida would be split 11 for Gore and 14 for Bush. An analysis of this plan using the election returns since 1960 would have sent Nixon instead of Kennedy to the White House in 1960, and would have resulted in a tied electoral count (269 to 269) in the Ford and Carter race in 1976.

The biggest advantage would be the nearly complete elimination of post election lawsuits. Questionable outcomes would be limited for the most part to individual congressional districts, not statewide like we have now or nationwide like we would have under a popular vote scenario. Yes, it would still be mathematically possible to win the popular vote, but lose the electoral vote, but such a reform would ultimately be more decisive.

That would be a good start (or alternative perhaps?). We already have it, more states should do it too...