The Electoral College is the Great Equalizer



If you are a woman of diminutive stature (I am only 5’2”) you appreciate the small advantage that comes from wearing high heels.  Wearing heels doesn’t make me as tall as everyone else, it just makes me a little more competitive in eye-to-eye conversations.   And that, oddly enough, explains why I love the Electoral College.  
Every election cycle produces people who want to eliminate the Electoral College as if it were an inflamed appendix.  Yet the Electoral College has worked smoothly over 94% of the time.  If you want more faithful service than that you need a golden retriever. 
Article II Section 1 of the Constitution is proof that the framers were intelligent masters of the concept of compromise.  There were some in 1787 who wanted the President of the United States elected by members of Congress.  Others thought he should be elected by direct vote of the people.  The common ground they came to was the Electoral College.  Each state was given a number of electors equal to its number of representatives and its two senators.  The inclusion of the two senators is the mathematically significant piece.  It empowers the small states disproportionate to their size by factoring in equal representation in the Senate. 
            Most people know that when they vote for a Presidential candidate they are really voting for a slate of Presidential electors, commonly called the Electoral College.  The party who gets the majority (or plurality) of the votes in any particular state gets to send their electors to the college.  These chosen electors then meet on the Monday following the second Wednesday in December.  [Sounds like figuring out Easter doesn’t it?  Remember, these rules were made in the days of literal horse power.]  They meet in their respective states and cast their ballots. The candidate who gets the majority of electoral votes (in this case, 270 of 538) becomes President of the United States, announced officially on January 6.  Of course we all know the results of both the popular and electoral college vote within hours of the November election.  Or do we?
On principle, these representatives are selected by their party to vote for the candidate of their party, BUT they do not have to.  They are free agents, allowed to vote for anyone they wish—the opposition candidate, their spouse, a football quarterback—they vote their conscience.  Has this ever happened?  Only about 200 times; eight times in my life time alone.  
            Many people are sure that the Electoral College gives disproportionate strength to the big states.  California gets 55 delegates, Texas 38, New York 29…; while Wyoming, Vermont, the Dakotas, Montana, Delaware, and Alaska get only 3.  On the surface this might look unfair, but it is, in fact, just the opposite.  The Electoral College gives added strength to the small states, and dilutes the strength of the large ones.   
            For simplicity let’s look at just the smallest and largest states by population: Wyoming and California.  Wyoming has 0.17% of the total U.S. population, while California has 11.95% of the same.  California is 70 times larger than Wyoming.  Does that mean that they get 70 times more votes in the electoral college?  No.  California only has 18 times more delegates than Wyoming because no matter how large or small, both states get credit for two senatorial votes.   In essence, Wyoming “buys” an electoral vote for only 200,000 people while the same vote costs a Californian almost 700,000 people.  Earning a single electoral vote for “Jones” instead of “Smith” costs Californians more than 3 times as much as it does the citizens of Wyoming.
            Without the Electoral College, it would take the population of 31 states at the low end of the population to equal the population of California alone.  With the Electoral College it only takes the lowest 16 states to equal California’s clout.
            The next time someone criticizes the Electoral College, ask them to look at more than the numbers.  Ask them to look at the math. 
            God bless the founding fathers and keep the faith.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Witches in Georgia, Nuts in Texas

Some time ago a woman in Georgia won a restraining order against a man who had been stalking her for months.   She had met him when he answered her advertisement in a singles column.   In the ad she described herself as a, “wiccan” priestess—a witch!   She was then shocked that she didn’t attract an intelligent, emotionally mature male.   Instead she got a weird, obsessive stalker.   Whom did she think she was going to get? I realize that I am probably not being as tolerant as the times require, but it seems to me that any adult who calls herself a witch should not be expected to be taken seriously.   Do adults have to be told that there are no such things as witches?   Didn’t we learn that sometime between the Salem Witch Trials and the dawning of the nuclear age?   What seems to be going on here is that the mantra of tolerance which rightly began as a way to combat institutionalized prejudice has been carried to an extreme that says we can n...
Read more

Is Obama One of Our Four Best Presidents?

My default setting for a good book is a biography, add a penchant for American history and you have someone who reads a lot of Presidential biographies.   I am up to 13 so far, and plan on covering every President before I die, God willing.   Naturally, it caught my attention when President Obama said he would put his administration up with the top four Presidents.                 President Obama was clearly one of those children who were constantly told by his parents and grandparents that he was, “special.”   He was a special person; his parents were special people and everybody else, particularly people who didn’t think he was special, were wrong, jealous and possibly evil.   Such children grow up with an exaggerated sense of self.   We usually only see this syndrome in athletes or Hollywood stars, because politicians have to come up the hard way and there are lots of people to let them know ju...
Read more

Chris Christie and the Young Vampires of the Tea Party

The Tea Party has given this nation a much needed fiscal intervention, but they are like young vampires.   I can best explain this discord with an analogy of Stephanie Meyers’ excellent books advocating teenage chastity.   Meyers wrote the Twilight series of novels about vegetarian vampires who are under siege from vampires who want traditional vampire values.   Traditional vampires want to kill humans by sucking them dry (which is what Democrats feel about successful business people).    Our vegetarian vampires want to live at peace with everyone while simply being left alone to enjoy whatever vampire-like existence they choose (much like Americans in general).    But complicating things to the max are an army of young vampires.   Young vampires are undisciplined, emotional and ready to kill everything, including each other.   Enter the Tea Party.   New to the game, new to the town, and obeying only one overpowering and all con...
Read more