Minority rule, majority rights? How the Electoral College and Senate structure impact political power in the United States
What to Know:
-
The Electoral College, established in 1787, balances power between large and small states in presidential elections.
-
Critics say it undermines "one person, one vote," as seen when candidates win the presidency without the popular vote (e.g., 2000 and 2016).
-
It increases polarization by favoring swing states and creating gaps between popular and Electoral College votes.
-
Reform efforts include difficult constitutional amendments and the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) to align the presidency with the national popular vote.
The Electoral College was designed to balance power between states with differing populations, ensuring smaller states had a voice in presidential elections. While it aimed to create an equitable system, it has sparked debate over its impact on democracy.
Historical Roots of the Electoral College
The Electoral College was established during the drafting of the U.S. Constitution in 1787 as part of a broader negotiation known as the Great Compromise. Large and small state representatives sought influence commensurate with their size, while smaller state representatives feared being overshadowed. This system was designed to balance their competing interests. In order to allay these worries, the Electoral College assigned each state, regardless of population size, a fixed number of electors based on its congressional representation.
The same ideas that influenced the design of the US legislative branch are reflected in the Electoral College. The bicameral legislature consists of two chambers: the House of Representatives, where representation is proportional to state populations, and the Senate, where each state—regardless of size—has equal representation. This setup ensures that smaller states retain a voice comparable to larger states. Similar to this, smaller states can have a greater influence than their population in presidential elections thanks to the Electoral College.
The Electoral College and Its Connection to the Senate
The Electoral College, like the Senate, is designed to give smaller states disproportionate influence in presidential elections. For instance, Wyoming, with a population of about 580,000, receives three electoral votes, while California, with nearly 39 million people, gets 55. However, voters in Wyoming have far more electoral power per capita than those in California.
|
The Impact: Wyoming has 68 times fewer people per electoral vote compared to California, meaning voters in smaller states like Wyoming have a significantly larger impact on the outcome of elections. This small-state bias is a fundamental feature of the Electoral College, ensuring that less populous states have a stronger voice in the presidential election process. |
Criticisms of the Electoral College
A major criticism of the Electoral College is that it undermines the principle of "one person, one vote" by allowing significant disparities in voting power based on geography. This system can result in a candidate winning the presidency without securing the majority of the popular vote.
For example, Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the presidency to George W. Bush due to the Electoral College. In a similar vein, Donald Trump won the presidency by winning the majority of the Electoral College and several crucial battleground states, despite Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote by roughly 2.9 million votes. These instances highlight the disconnect between the popular vote and the Electoral College.
Explaining the Democrat Popular Vote/Win Gap
The Electoral College is criticized for amplifying political polarization by creating a disconnect between the popular vote and election outcomes. Despite winning the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections, Democrats often struggle to secure the presidency due to how electoral votes are distributed, which favors swing states over populous ones. This system leads candidates to focus on battleground states, making some votes carry more weight than others and diminishing the influence of voters in more predictable states.
This issue also affects other government branches, such as the Senate, where smaller states have disproportionate representation. This imbalance allows the preferences of a minority to shape election results and policy decisions, further intensifying political divides. Critics argue that the Electoral College distorts democratic representation, especially in a polarized political climate, despite its aim to ensure broad geographic representation.
Wrap Up
The Electoral College system has long been a source of contention, particularly when it comes to its impact on the popular vote. Critics argue that the Electoral College distorts democratic representation, as it allows a candidate to win the presidency without securing the majority of the popular vote. This system, which was established to balance the influence of states with varying populations, has led to situations where the popular vote and Electoral College results diverge significantly.
This imbalance extends to other branches of government, like the Senate, where states with smaller populations have disproportionate representation. This creates a scenario where the preferences of a minority can determine election results and policy decisions, exacerbating political divides.
