Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution created the ElectoralCollege. “Each state shall appoint, in such Manneras the legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal tothe whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the Statemay be entitled in Congress.”
Simply put, each state receives as many electoral votes as it hassenators and representatives. Therefore, each state, including theDistrict of Columbia, will have at least three electoral votes.
How could a president win the popular vote (the people’s vote) andstill lose the presidential seat?
Well, let’s take a look at the simple facts, without going intofluffy details.
The founding fathers of our U.S. Constitution created theElectoral College for many reasons. In the old days, the framers didnot want a direct vote by the people because they believed the peoplecould not know enough about the qualifications of each candidate,especially if the candidate was not from their region of the country.
The framers hoped the chosen electors would be most knowledgeableabout each candidate. They could then narrow down the field fromseveral candidates to two or three best suited for the presidency.
According to author David Johnson, only three times in U.S.history has a candidate won the popular vote but still lost theelection.
In 1824, Andrew Jackson won both the popular and electoral votebut still lost the election. But, neither he nor his three opponentswon the majority (more than 50 percent) in the Electoral College, sothe House of Representatives decided the winner. The House electedJohn Quincy Adams, who had initially come in with the second mostelectoral and popular votes to Andrew Jackson.
In 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes garnered 48 percent of the popularvote, while his opponent, Samuel Tilden, won 51 percent. Hayes won185 electoral votes and Tilden got 184. In the end, Hayes wasdeclared president.
In 1888, Benjamin Harrison won the presidency although he receivedonly 47.8 percent of the popular vote. Harrison won 233 electoralvotes. His opponent Grover Cleveland captured 48.6 percent of thepopular vote, yet received only 168 electoral votes.
Electoral votes are allocated to states depending on their numberof members of the House of Representatives, which depends on thestate’s population and the number of senators, which is always two(but the Electoral College can never consist of members of the Houseor Senate).
So, for instance, California gets 54 electoral votes because wehave 52 members in the House and two senators. Every state is allowedthree or more electoral votes, never any less, such as the Districtof Columbia, which has three electoral votes.
Has the Electoral College surpassed its usefulness?
Yes, I dare say it has definitely passed its prime. In 47 states,and in the District of Columbia, it is a winner-takes-all system. Thewinner of the state’s popular vote receives all of that state’selectoral votes. Even if a candidate receives only one more popularvote than his opponent does, he still captures all of the state’selectoral votes. This is undemocratic — especially if the minorityof votes was divided between more than two other candidates.
Because it is virtually impossible to amend our Constitution andabolish the Electoral College, I believe each state should convert tothe road of proportional representation.
Only two states do not abide by the winner-takes-all system.Nebraska and Maine allocate their electoral votes proportionally. Twoof each state’s electors are chosen by a statewide popular vote andthe rest are chosen by the popular vote within each congressionaldistrict. Electoral votes are individually awarded to the candidatewith the most votes in each congressional district, with two bonusvotes given to the state wide winner.
That’s what I call true democracy in action.
–Cheryl Daen is a political science junior. Send e-mail todaletter2000@hotmail.com
–This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of TheDaily Aztec.
