1 / 53

Electoral College

Electoral College. Why did we do this? Why do we still have it? What political interests are preserved via Electoral College So, you want to be an Elector?. Electoral College. What is it Constitutional compromise Indirect election of President

selena
Download Presentation

Electoral College

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Electoral College • Why did we do this? • Why do we still have it? • What political interests are preserved via Electoral College • So, you want to be an Elector?

  2. Electoral College • What is it • Constitutional compromise • Indirect election of President • Electing a group of people to select Head of Government

  3. Electoral College • Brief History • 1789, no such thing as national elections • Few people with national visibility • No national media / communication • Impossible to conduct national campaign • No party system • many potential candidates

  4. Electoral College • History • 1789, not clear what the role of the President would be • An extension of Congress • A Prime Minister • No Big Deal, and they knew GW would be it • Solution: • Each state’s legislature pick group of people to decide who to support

  5. Electoral College • Founder’s ‘solution’ • Article 2.1 • each state shall appoint, in a Manner as the Legislature therof may direct, an Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Represenatives • Meet in their state, cast votes for two people, send votes to US Senate

  6. Electoral College • Founders’ solution • Person with most votes is President, person with 2nd most votes is VP • If a tie, Congress decides • Didn’t think that President and Vice President might be enemies

  7. Electoral College • Early Problems • States didn’t know what to do • How appoint electors? • 1789 • New York’s legislature couldn’t agree • States didn’t know how to keep VP candidate (Adams) from having as many votes as Washington

  8. Electoral College • History / Problems • 1789 method of selection • 5 states used legislature to appoint (NY) • MA appointed some by legislature, some by legislature from list of top 2 candidates in each Cong. district • NH 5 electors selected by voters statewide • VA 10 electors selected by voters in districts • 1789, 1792 ‘unanimous’ elections

  9. Electoral College • Problems • 1789 - 1800 • 6 of 12 states selected by popular vote • states often split EC delegation • Selection in 1789, 1796, 1800 not winner-take-all • What might this cause?

  10. Electoral College • 1796 First ‘real’ contest • 4 well known candidates • Adams (Fed), Pinckney (Fed), Jefferson (DR), Burr (DR) • weak concept of party ‘running mate’ • If top 2 tied, goes to Congress

  11. Electoral College • 1796 Results (140 voters, 70 to win ) • Adams (F) 35,726 (53%) 71 EC votes • Jefferson (D) 31,115 (47%) 69 EC votes • Pinckney (F) 59 EC votes • Burr (D) 30 EC votes • Hamilton wanted Pinckney, got some SC Electors to vote Jefferson / Pinkney

  12. Electoral College • Or, if this happened today: • President Romney • Vice President Biden • President GW Bush • Vice President Kerry

  13. Electoral College • 1796 • Adams (F) / Pinckney (F) 45 - 49 • Jefferson (D) / Burr (D) 25 - 30 • Jefferson (D) / S. Adams (D) 14 - 15 • Adams (F) / Ellsworth (F) 11 • Jefferson (D) / Pinckney (F) 9 - 14 • Jefferson (D) / Clinton (D) 6 - 7 • Adams (F) / Jay (F) 5 • Adams (F) / Jefferson (D) 1 - 6

  14. Electoral College • 1800 • an accidental tie • Result • Jefferson (DR) 41,330 (61%) 73 EC • Burr (DR) 73 EC • Adams (F) 25,952 (39%) 65 EC • Pinckney (F) 64 EC • Jay (F) 1 EC

  15. Electoral College • 1800 • Jefferson was supposed to be Dems top choice, Burr # 2 • Tie goes to House of Reps • ‘Lame Duck’ Federalists controlled • 16 state delegations, each w/ 1 vote • need majority (9 votes)

  16. Electoral College • 1800 • For one week, over 35 ballots, Jefferson got just 8 votes • Hamilton told Federalists Jefferson less worse than Burr • Federalists switch on 36th Ballot, Jefferson wins

  17. Electoral College • 1804 • Burr runs for Governor of NY • Hamilton smears Burr • Burr gets even. • Shoots Hamilton • Hamilton dead

  18. Electoral College • 1804 • 12th Amendment • Electors cast one vote for President • Separate vote for Vice President • Still up to Congress to break ties

  19. Electoral College • Developments since 1800s • Popular voting more common post 1830 • National political parties • Move toward ‘winner take all’ rules in many states • only 2 left that divide up Electors (NE, ME)

  20. Electoral College • Poor Record? • 4 times populat vote winner different than Electoral College: • 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 • twice (1824, 1876) Congress has had to select President…came close in 1968 • 11 of 34 election had no popular vote majority winner

  21. Electoral College • Current Issues • Deadlines • Apportionment • Faithless electors • Election failures

  22. Electoral College • How it works today • need 270 Electors to win • state delegation = number of members of Congress • Each candidate files a slate of trusted electors w/ Secretary of State • Electors pledged to support their candidate

  23. Electoral College • How it works today • States decide how many electors each candidate gets after popular vote • nearly all states = winner take all • Federal Law & Deadlines • Electors meet at Capitol, December 13th • Deadline for National Archives December 22nd • Congress certifies election January 6th

  24. Electoral College • Deadlines • created massive problem in 2000 • Florida recount, lawsuits taking weeks • December 13 deadline looming • Major factor forcing US Supreme Court to intervene

  25. Electoral College • Apportionent • Not by population • Senate seats skew influence of smallest states • One EC vote in WY = 198,000 people • One EC vote in VT = 200,000 people • One EC vote in NY, CA IL, FL, TX = 600,000 people

  26. Electoral College • Apportionment • 20 smallest states have 30m people • they get 80 EC votes (44 if by population) • AK, DE, DC, HI, ID, ME, MT, ND, NH, RI, SD, VT, WY…NE, NM, WV, (Bold = 150%) • NY+ NJ = 28m people • they get 46 EC votes • CA = 36m people • it gets 55 EC votes

  27. Electoral College • Apportionment • A structural partisan advantage? • What are the politics of smallest states? • Bush beat Gore by 13% in smallest states • GW Bush won 61 of 84 small state electors in 2000

  28. Electoral College • Apportionment • if allocated by population, GOP candidates win 20 fewer EC votes 2000 & 2004 • or, GOP candidates started w/ a built-in 20 EC vote head start given political geography • Change after re-apportionment 2010

  29. Electoral College • Apportionment • What are the reasons for over-representing small states in the EC • Today, what purpose is served?

  30. Electoral College • Faithless Electors • might be the least of our worries • rare, typically protest votes • can this be regulated?

  31. Electoral College • Election Failures • What is the point of popular vote for a national office • aggregate national opinion, produce outcome

  32. Electoral College • Election Failure • EC not good at producing a winner with majority popular support • Manufactured majorities • EC good at translating narrow popular vote wins into clear EC majorities • Reagan 1980; Clinton’s 43 % in 1992

  33. Electoral College • Attempts at Reform • Constitutional Amendments • after 1948, award electors proportionate to popular vote in state • 64 Y in Senate, died in House • after 1968, Direct Election of President • 338 votes in House, 51 in Senate

  34. Electoral College • Reform Proposals • Colorado 2004 • PR allocation inside state • why is this a dumb idea? • California 2007 • winner-take-all by congressional district • just as dumb?

  35. 2000 Pop EC vote by CD by PR Gore 48.4 % 266 (49 % ) 251 257 Bush 47.9 270 (51 %) 287 258 Nader 2.7 20 others 1.0 3 1996 Clinton 49.2379 (70 %) 345 262 Dole 40.7 159 (30 %) 193 220 Perot 8.4 49 others 1.7 7 1992 Clinton 43.0 370 (69%) 324 232 Bush 37.5 168 (31 % ) 214 203 Perot 18.9 102 1980 Reagan 50.7489 (91 %) 396273 Carter 41.0 49 (9 %) 142 221 Anderson 6.6 35 others 1.9 9 BOLD = MAJORITY

  36. 1976 Carter 50.1297 (55 % ) 269 270 Ford 48.0 240 (45 % ) 269 258 others 1.8 10 1968 Nixon 43.2301 (56 %) 289 231 Humphr 42.7 191 (35 %) 192 225 Wallace 13.5 46 (8 %) 57 79 others 0.6 2 1960 Kennedy 49.8 303 (56 %) 278 266 Nixon 49.5 219 (41%) 245 266 unaffil. 0.7 15 (3% ) 14 5 BOLD = MAJORITY

  37. Electoral College • Current Reform Proposals • Motivated by difficulty of amending US Constitution • direct election obvious reform, but hardest to achieve • State by state compact only other option

  38. Electoral College • National Popular Vote Compact • States by state agreement to award state EC votes to national pop. vote winner • In effect when approved by states w/ majority of electors • Now law in states = to 132 electoral votes • 49% of 270

  39. Electoral College • How would direct election change campaigns? • Large states • Small states • Urban areas • Rural areas

  40. Electoral College • How would direct election change campaigns? Less emphasis on handfull of “battleground” states • 2008 McCain + Obama visited few small states (NM, NV, NH) • none of the 14 other smallest

  41. Electoral College

  42. Electoral College • How would direct election change campaigns? Less emphasis on handfull of “battleground” states • Obama + McCain ignored 4 of 5 largest states (CA, NY, TX, IL)

  43. Electoral College • Direct election diffuse campaign • goal = plurality of votes • What strategies • TV time cheap in small & rural states • Mobilize urban areas • Who advantaged?

  44. Electoral College • How would NPV change role of third parties? • What incentives to run? • What effects on contests? • G. Wallace 1968; Nader 2000

  45. Electoral College • Popular vote: • Plurality winner vs. majority winner • Popular vote does not produce majority winner • NPV + IRV ?

  46. Electoral College • Who advantaged by status quo? • Small states • Republicans (slightly) • Battle ground states • Hogs, corn & wheat • Already well protected in US Senate

  47. Electoral College • Who disadvantaged • Larger states • Non competitive states • Citrus, vegetables

  48. Electoral College • Protects interests of “states” • Protected in Senate • What are states? • what common interest of AK, HI, ND, VT, etc....

  49. Electoral College • Legitimacy crisis? • What if Gore wasn’t a gracious non-winner in 2000? • What if GW Bush “lost” FL under suspicious circumstances, but won nationally by 500,000 votes? • how much legitimacy would GOP have granted President Gore?

  50. Electoral College • Or: • Obama wins 2008 with results nearly identical to Kerry vote in 2004 (but narrowly wins OH) • Narrow EC victory, lose NPV by 2%, 2,000,000 votes • Given hostility in face of near landslide in ‘08, how would GOP have responded?

More Related