Aim: Is the Electoral College effective?

Do Now: Read the text below and use it to answer the following questions

• 1) Why was the first idea rejected?

• 2) Why was the second idea rejected?

• 3) Why was the third idea rejected?

History of the Electoral College

• The eventual solution to this problem was to create an electoral college

• The writers of the Constitutions sought to prevent the rise of political parties and campaigning (the motto was “the office should seek the man, the man should not seek the office”)

• The electoral college is a process for electing the President and Vice President

Choosing Electors• Each state would be allocated a number of

electors based on their representation in Congress, with one elector per Representatives (depends on population) and Senator (always two)

• Each state’s legislature would decide on its own how to select electors, who would typically be chosen by the state legislators, but members of Congress and federal employees were barred from serving as one

What system was seeking to be maintained by including this provision?

Example!

• Texas with 36 Representatives gets how many votes?__________

• Louisiana with 6 Representatives gets how many votes?_________

• New York with 27 Representatives gets how many votes?_______

Choosing Electors

• Each States electors would met in their own states, rather than at one national meeting, when selecting their choices for President

Why might this be included?

Choosing Electors• Each elector would select two choices for President,

with one having to be from outside their home state, a process that sought to elect “everyone’s second choice”.

• The votes would then be sent to the President of the Senate to be read, with the winner becoming President and the runner up becoming Vice President

• In case of a tie, it would be settled by the House of Representatives and, if they could not pick a winner, it would be decided by the Senate.

• Seem confusing? That was sort of the point!

Changes to the Electoral College

• With the rise of political parties shortly after the nations foundation, there quickly became an issue with people voting in blocs, and the fear of having the President and Vice President belong to different parties

• The 12th Amendment would slightly alter the system, calling for each elector to vote for a President and Vice President, with a tie for President being settled by the House and a tie for Vice President being settled by the Senate

• Does this system seem better or worse than initially designed?

Changes to the Electoral College

• Before long, most states had adopted a system where electors would be chosen based on popular vote, where each citizen would cast a ballot for as many electors as that state was given.

• Today, all states (excluding Maine and Nebraska) select their electors like this.

Evolution of the Winner-Takes-All system

• The rise of political parties presented a problem to the system, since all states would leave it up to their political parties to select electors, and each person would naturally support the candidate that belonged to the political party they agreed with.

• Let’s say you are a citizen of Nevada with 5 electoral votes, and your ballot looks like this:

Election between Mr. Fontano (Republican) and Mrs. Aguado

(Democrat)Below, Select five electors

John Smith (R) Jorah Mormont (D)

Jon Snow (D) Jamie Lanister (R)

Stannis Baratheon (R) Theon Greyjoy (R)

Ned Stark (R) Samwell Tarly (R)

Melisandre (D) Catelyn Stark (D)

Tyrion Lannister (D)

Based on how many electors are presented and assuming a 50/50 split in support, who is more likely to win?

10%

10%

10%

10%

10%

8%

8%

8%

8%

8%

8%

The Democrats are more likely to have more electors win, even if the vote is split evenly between Democrats and Republics!

Evolution of the Winner-Takes-All system

• Because of the issues of this system of electors and the existence of political parties, most states (except Maine and Nebraska) would develop a Winner-Takes-All system, where the electors would be chosen based on the popular vote in the state for a given candidate those electors promise to vote for

Evolution of the Winner-Takes-All system

• The system was the logical way to prevent voter confusion from deciding elections, as opposed to popular choice.

• Today, there are 538 total electors, so 270 is the total needed to win the Presidency.

• What problems do you imagine emerging from this system?

• The United States is the only country that elects a politically powerful president via an electoral college and the only one in which a candidate can become president without having obtained the highest number of votes in the sole or final round of popular voting.

• —George C. Edwards, 2011

• The electoral college does not provide a straightforward process for selecting the president. Instead, it can be extraordinarily complex and has the potential to undo the people's will at many points in the long journey from the selection of electors to counting their votes in Congress.

• —George Edwards, 2011• https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=SGoL1jYxu5E#t=62

Rutherford B Hayes (1876), Bejamin Harrison (1888) and George W Bush (2000) were all elected President while losing the popular vote

In an extreme case, it is possible to become President while only winning 22% of the popular vote

2004 Bush v Kerry (hands are visits, dollar signs are money spent on campaign adds in millions)

• Voter turnout in non swing states very rarely matters (all votes for Republicans in a state like New York are “wasted”)

• It helps discourage third-party candidates, since while a third candidate may win some support in all states, it’s unlikely they would receive a majority vote in any given state.