Valerie Cella, Emory University
Does your vote really matter? Think about it for a minute. How can we expect to be patriotic, voting United States citizens without truly examining our nation’s voting processes. Why is it essential if we vote, if the electoral college dismays the popular vote anyways. Is the electoral college even fair?
Just like our evolution as a country, we must delve into the issues of our voting system to determine should we scrap the system and turn towards the popular vote to determine our leadership.
Most notably, in 2016 President Donald Trump lost the popular vote to former First Lady Hillary Clinton. To be exact, polls counted 2,864,974 additional votes going to Clinton. The media roared in protest at the disregard of the popular opinion. Yet, this was not the first time the nominated candidate won the popular but not the electoral vote. Historically, the History, Art, and Archives section of the United States House of Representatives lists this dis-junction has occurred 5 times in United States history. Andrew Jackson, Samuel Tilden, Grover Cleveland, Al Gore, and Hillary Clinton. It’s rare, but it happens, and the premise that we should scrap the entire system in its entirety because of the most recent election string discontent with many Americans.
But let’s answer the question while on the topic: “Is the electoral college equal in today’s world.”
“The majority does not rule and every vote is not equal – those are reasons enough for scrapping the system. But there are other consequences as well. This election has been making clear how the Electoral College distorts presidential campaigns. A few swing states take on oversize importance, leading the candidates to focus their attention, money and promises on a small slice of the electorate.”
The New York Times: The New York Times (29 Aug 2004). Editorial/Opinion. “Making Votes Count; Abolish the Electoral College.”
Every vote is not equal. Certain swing states determine an entire election based on electors that have no obligation to abide by the wills of the people’s vote. (a list of those states found below). A blue vote in a red state will still vote in your state’s electors voting red. The vice versa remains true. However, with that mentality, then the representation of your state remains untrue. If individuals believe that they have no say in their electorate’s votes, they don’t vote. That mentality contributed to the 42.9% of individuals that did not vote in the 2016 November elections.
Still: You have a say in your state’s electorate in 29 states, and in the remaining 21 states, you have the right to change the system through local votes and petitions.
In the electoral college, supporters state that it ensures each whole state count proportionately. In the creation of the electoral college, certain smaller states feared their citizens would not be counted for equally in comparison to larger states’ populations, so the founded designed the electorate to ensure the consensus of a majority of states rather than a majority of individual people.
What about now. Our country looks drastically different than when our Founders wrote their solutions.
Since then, The Electoral College has shifted to distort national campaigns, encourage individuals to not vote, and promote identity-politics. Candidates feel obligated to pander towards a certain majority identity of particular states rather than focus on their leadership plans for our collective future. Political beliefs become formed with the seal of swing state approvals disregarding all others. Political campaigns become focused on winning rather than us, the people.
So on one hand, the Electoral College ensures states are proportionately equal regardless of voter turnout (an issue we face as a nation). Individuals may vote to obligate electors to vote the way of the state; therefore, you only have to gain a majority of the state, rather than a majority of the nation. The nation’s founders did so to mandate residents of smaller states find statewide representation on a national platform. But with an emphasis on winning rather than the people, I instead raise the question, “If our elections are now too focused on the state rather than the individual vote, why shouldn’t we use the popular vote….”
The states with legal control over their electors are the following 29 and D.C.:
States with Legal Control over electors
Alabama (Code of Ala. §17-19-2)
Alaska (Alaska Stat. §15.30.090)
California (Election Code §6906)
Colorado (CRS §1-4-304)
Connecticut (Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-176)
Delaware (15 Del C §4303)
District of Columbia (§1-1312(g))
Florida (Fla. Stat. §103.021(1))
Hawaii (HRS §14-28)
Maine (21-A MRS §805)
Maryland (Md Ann Code art 33, §8-505)
Massachusetts (MGL, ch. 53, §8)
Michigan (MCL §168.47)
Mississippi (Miss Code Ann §23-15-785)
Montana (MCA §13-25-104)
Nebraska (§32-714)
Nevada (NRS §298.050)
New Mexico (NM Stat Ann §1-15-9)
North Carolina (NC Gen Stat §163-212)
Ohio (ORC Ann §3505.40)
Oklahoma (26 Okl St §10-102)
Oregon (ORS §248.355)
South Carolina (SC Code Ann §7-19-80)
Tennessee (Tenn Code Ann §2-15-104(c))
Utah (Utah Code Ann §20A-13-304)
Vermont (17 VSA §2732)
Virginia (§24.2-203)
Washington (RCW §29.71.020)
Wisconsin (Wis Stat §7.75)
Wyoming (Wyo Stat §22-19-108)