The Electoral College

I

If you want to know why we have an Electoral College instead of a popular vote for president, you will have to go on the internet and read all the history that goes along with this decision. As far as I’m concerned, it’s not why we have it, but that we have it and have to live with it.

I’m going to use the 2016 election as an example of an election where Hillary got a few million more votes than Donald, but Donald won. What that has done to our country is still being disputed now and may affect our country for many years to come. So, to some extent, I’m upset that a decision made a couple of hundred years ago is affecting my life today.

So, the winner losing is a problem. However just changing to a popular vote creates other problems. If we just go by the popular vote, the Repos might never win another election. When we started, the candidate with the most electoral vote got to be president and the runner up got to b vice president. Donald and Hillary, that would have been a hell of a four years.  Biden and Donald, wow. So, let’s look at the other two problems, meaningless votes and how the Electoral College votes are allocated to the states and see if there is a solution.

The second problem with the Electoral College is the winner take all that is used in 48 of the 50 states. If one party gets just 1 more vote than the other party, that party gets all the electoral votes. In states like Mississippi  and Washington, where one party wins by a huge amount, casting a vote for the minority party is pointless.

If we go to a popular vote for president, the Demos will win every time. Currently, there are a lot more Demos than Repubs. The current system puts all the pressure on a few swing states, where winning the ‘winner takes all vote’ can win the election. This is where the candidates spend their money and their time. The solution to this problem is simple. Award the popular vote according to the percentage of people who voted for the candidate. So, if in Washington, with 12 electoral votes, 60% voted for the Demo and 40% voted for the Repo, the Demo would get 7.2 EV’s and the Repo 4.8 EV’s. Each vote would matter and more people would vote. Yes, there are fractions. We could forget about the electors, and just have the state send in the votes, or give the fractional part to the winner. That would leave Washington with an 8 to 4 advantage. That’s still better tan what the Repubs get now. How would this method affect the 2016 and the 2020 elections? Coming soon!

Of course the Repubs could take a direction that appeals to the whole country, take Eisenhower and Reagen for example, and just win the popular vote.

We still haven’t solved the third problem, the one vote per voter isn’t part of the presidential election. What, I get to go to the poles and cast my vote and it’s counted as one vote.

Right, but you’re not voting for president, you’re voting for a slate of electors. So how does this change the vote? Let’s just look at two states, the one with the highest population and the one with the lowest. That pits California, 39,029,342 people, VS Wyoming, 581,851. California has 68 times more people than Wyoming, but only 18 times as many electoral votes. Wyoming gets 1 electoral vote for every 193,793 residents and California, 1 electoral vote for every 722,765 residents. So, it takes 4 California votes to equal 1 Wyoming vote or a California vote is worth one fourth of a Wyoming vote. To make a California vote equal to a Wyoming vote, California would have to have 201 electoral votes.

Sorry, but if you use either one of my solutions, awarding the electors by the percentage of the vote in each state, or raising the number of electors each state get to reflect the 1 man 1 vote ideal, Clinton and Biden win. Only a method of selecting our president that’s a few hundred years old will allow a loser to be declared the winner. Time for a change.