Revising the Electoral College

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why are we still electing electors? So that states like Idaho and Wyoming don't get forgotten during the General Election? Because I don't remember any campaign events in Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota for Biden or Trump.

Regardless, the Electoral College seems the only way the Republicans can take the White House these days, having lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes. So it isn't going anywhere.

 

[Patooka]

Why are we still electing electors? So that states like Idaho and Wyoming don't get forgotten during the General Election? Because I don't remember any campaign events in Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota for Biden or Trump.

Regardless, the Electoral College seems the only way the Republicans can take the White House these days, having lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes. So it isn't going anywhere.

I guess Republicans would be fine with redistricting the senate then to be more representative of the United States as a whole. I'm sure Trausti is arguing in good faith.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Why are we still electing electors? So that states like Idaho and Wyoming don't get forgotten during the General Election? Because I don't remember any campaign events in Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota for Biden or Trump.

Regardless, the Electoral College seems the only way the Republicans can take the White House these days, having lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes. So it isn't going anywhere.

I guess Republicans would be fine with redistricting the senate then to be more representative of the United States as a whole. I'm sure Trausti is arguing in good faith.

The senate isn't subject to districting (other than state boundaries), so I'm not sure what this is referring to.

 

[TomC]

They are not irrelevant, as they often align with the voters of other small states. Why should they give that up and leave to California and New York to decide the winner?

If I were an American, I would say fuck how the small states feel. At the moment the minority is holding the majority hostage in deciding who should represent the United States. If you don't want rural regions being ignored in government, all you have to do is ensure each state has an equal number of representatives in the senate, like every other first world nation does it.

Oh, wait...that's already the case. So it's a bullshit argument that small states would be side lined if the Electoral College ceased to exist. The argument can very easily be made that the most influential person in the US government for the last decade has been the Majority Speaker for the Senate.

Also, because of the Senate, the small states already have a disproportionate amount of power (and given that the senate controls who gets on the courts, they have ridiculous control over 2/3 branches, the EC gives them disproportionate control of all 3, which is often ignored by those in their claims of 'fairness').

The EC needs to be scrapped, and the small states would still have too much control in the US. If they think it makes them irrelevant, they're either too ignorant to be voting, or they're liars.

I once heard a claim, backed up with math I don't remember, that makes sense. The average Wyoming voter has ~70× the clout in Washington DC as the average California voter.

This was a complicated formula. It's based on Wyoming having such a small population. But from their representation in the House, to their outsized representation in the Senate, to their outsized representation in the EC, coupled with the outsized representation on SCOTUS(due to outsized representation in EC(the president) and Senate who determine SCOTUS judges).

The first thing that popped into my head at the time was "And there are still people in Wyoming who complain about The Swamp?!?"

Tom

 

[Worldtraveller]

Also, because of the Senate, the small states already have a disproportionate amount of power (and given that the senate controls who gets on the courts, they have ridiculous control over 2/3 branches, the EC gives them disproportionate control of all 3, which is often ignored by those in their claims of 'fairness').

The EC needs to be scrapped, and the small states would still have too much control in the US. If they think it makes them irrelevant, they're either too ignorant to be voting, or they're liars.

I once heard a claim, backed up with math I don't remember, that makes sense. The average Wyoming voter has ~70× the clout in Washington DC as the average California voter.

This was a complicated formula. It's based on Wyoming having such a small population. But from their representation in the House, to their outsized representation in the Senate, to their outsized representation in the EC, coupled with the outsized representation on SCOTUS(due to outsized representation in EC(the president) and Senate who determine SCOTUS judges).

The first thing that popped into my head at the time was "And there are still people in Wyoming who complain about The Swamp?!?"

Tom

I don't know how to calculate something like that, but yeah, every state in the midwest has way more clout in DC than they should, but still complain that they don't have any influence. The idiots (and I mean really really ignorant of how even basic gov functions happen) I encountered living in the midwest was staggering.

 

[Patooka]

Why are we still electing electors? So that states like Idaho and Wyoming don't get forgotten during the General Election? Because I don't remember any campaign events in Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota for Biden or Trump.

Regardless, the Electoral College seems the only way the Republicans can take the White House these days, having lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes. So it isn't going anywhere.

I guess Republicans would be fine with redistricting the senate then to be more representative of the United States as a whole. I'm sure Trausti is arguing in good faith.

The senate isn't subject to districting (other than state boundaries), so I'm not sure what this is referring to.

Sorry I wasn't being clear. If the electoral college is the system in place to keep small states relevant, then maybe senators should represent a fixed percentage of the population, instead of how the seats are allocated now. Having small states placing their thumb on the scales in both the senate and the executive office is just bullshit.

 

[TomC]

The EC needs to be scrapped, and the small states would still have too much control in the US.

Here's the problem with scrapping the EC. It would require a Constitutional amendment. There's a process for that.

It's a long and arduous process, ripe for the corruption and divisiveness the USA is becoming famous for. Imagine the ERA on steroids.

We don't need that!
What

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

is advocating doesn't need a Constitutional amendment. It just needs enough state legislatures to recognize that the presidency should be an elected position, elected by every US voter with equal votes. The presidency is too important for state legislatures to just appoint EC delegates that will vote for their candidate, and pretend that it's the will of The People(even when it isn't).


If Trump and his Khrushchev like antics (The People? The People?! The People have no say!) doesn't get Americans rethinking our rigged system I don't know what will.

Maybe nothing.

Tom

 

[Worldtraveller]

The EC needs to be scrapped, and the small states would still have too much control in the US.

Here's the problem with scrapping the EC. It would require a Constitutional amendment. There's a process for that.

It's a long and arduous process, ripe for the corruption and divisiveness the USA is becoming famous for. Imagine the ERA on steroids.

We don't need that!
What

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

is advocating doesn't need a Constitutional amendment. It just needs enough state legislatures to recognize that the presidency should be an elected position, elected by every US voter with equal votes. The presidency is too important for state legislatures to just appoint EC delegates that will vote for their candidate, and pretend that it's the will of The People(even when it isn't).


If Trump and his Khrushchev like antics (The People? The People?! The People have no say!) doesn't get Americans rethinking our rigged system I don't know what will.

Maybe nothing.

Tom

I don't disagree with any of this.

 

[Elixir]

I had a suggestion - instead of voting for president, you vote for an elector based on his promise of who he will vote for, but his party affiliation isn't included on the ballot.

That's fabulous idea, Jason. Best idea ever.
How do you draw the districts? Without an answer to that question, your most excellent, incredibly awesome idea is just a detached fantasy on the same order as "Have a consortium of Christian, Islamic, and Hindu Gods appoint the President" .

BTW it would be far simpler and mor effective to require, State by State, that electors are chosen in accord with the national popular vote.
That would make it a lot hard for Putin to rig like in 2016... so Rethuglicans will never go for it.

What incentive would the smaller states have to essentially abolish the electoral college and make their own citizens’ votes irrelevant?

Unless there was overwhelming public consensus that a popular vote was more fair than the current system, it ain't happening. States like Colorado would present the problem. It has vacillated in the past. Right now it's blue-ish purple. But if it goes with the national popular vote and that vote is red, Dems would be very upset at the "unfairness". And vice versa. The fact that everyone's vote counts equally, carries little weight for the losers. So we get what we get.

 

[TomC]

States like Colorado would present the problem.

It has vacillated in the past. Right now it's blue-ish purple. But if it goes with the national popular vote and that vote is red, Dems would be very upset at the "unfairness". And vice versa. The fact that everyone's vote counts equally, carries little weight for the losers. So we get what we get.

Colorado already passed it.

Colorado Voters Approve National Popular Vote in Statewide Referendum
On November 3, 2020, Colorado became the first state in the country where voters approved the National Popular Vote at the ballot box. Click here for official election returns from the Colorado Secretary of state.

The "Yes On National Popular Vote" (Proposition 113) web site is at http://www.YesOnNationalPopularVote.comhttps://www.yesonnationalpopularvote.com/.

@Jimmy Higgins nailed it in post #61.

The Republicans are increasingly desperate to sell their products. The public is generally not interested, and it's getting increasingly dire for the GOP. Al Gore won by .5 million votes. Godzillary won by nearly 3 million votes. Biden won by well over double that margin. So the Republican Party is turning to increasingly desperate measures, like gerrymandering and voter ID suppression and the EC, just to keep their place at the hog trough of wealthy donors.

Tom

 

[Elixir]

Colorado already passed it.

Yes I know. (I live here!)
That's why I used it as an example. Despite being currently blue-ish, there is a predominance of Republicans - full-on trumpsuckers - in most rural areas. Put up a Republican presidential candidate who isn't a fat orange clown with a third grade vocabulary, and the State could flip in a heartbeat. But now, it's not an issue if the National popular vote stays Democratic, as it has for 7 of the last 8 elections.

 

[Lunawalk]

Gaming the Electoral College: Alternate Allocation Methods - "Don't like the results? Change the rules!"

Discussing several algorithms for translating each state's popular votes into Electoral-College allocations.

• WTA: popular-vote winner-take-all for all electors
• CDP: each Congressional district selects an elector, popular-vote WTA for the remaining two
• CDC: each Congressional district selects an elector, district-elector WTA for the remaining two
• PPV: proportional for all the electors corresponding to Reps, popular-vote WTA for the remaining two
• PVS: proportional for all the electors

Currently, all states but Maine and Nebraska use WTA, with those two states using CDP.

But what if the states used other algorithms? That site has calculations only for 2016 and 2012.

Algorithm	State	Each CD	Max CD	Pop Vote	Trump	Clinton	3rd	Romney	Obama	3rd
Actual					306	232		206	332
WTA	All				305	233		206	332
CDP	2	1			290	248		274	264
CDC		1	2		297	241		286	252
PPV	2			Prop.	276	257	5	255	282	1
PVS				Prop.	267	265	6	257	281

So if every state did in 2012 what ME and NE now do, Romney would have won in 2012.

With proportional allocation, Trump would have had a squeaker of a victory in 2016, because the lower-population states are upweighted.

Or how about abolish the electrol college and elect the president by popular vote.it basically a rubber stamp of the winner in a state and unnecessary layer of voting.

 

[lpetrich]

Or how about abolish the electrol college and elect the president by popular vote.it basically a rubber stamp of the winner in a state and unnecessary layer of voting.

I agree. But amending the US Constitution is difficult, because it's easy to obstruct that process. One needs 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the states. An alternative to the first part is a Constitutional Convention, but the only one that's ever been held was the first one, to create the original Constitution.

National Popular Vote has gotten a lot of success - 15 states and DC, with 196 electoral votes with 74 EV's to go.

 

[Lunawalk]

Or how about abolish the electrol college and elect the president by popular vote.it basically a rubber stamp of the winner in a state and unnecessary layer of voting.

I agree. But amending the US Constitution is difficult, because it's easy to obstruct that process. One needs 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the states. An alternative to the first part is a Constitutional Convention, but the only one that's ever been held was the first one, to create the original Constitution.

National Popular Vote has gotten a lot of success - 15 states and DC, with 196 electoral votes with 74 EV's to go.

If the people who benefit from the system can see how it disadvantage them it will change.lets say Biden won the electrol vote but lost the popular vote,the Trump fans will go crazy. By the next election it will be abolished. The people want change enough the politicians will follow.

 

[lpetrich]

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 68 - by Alexander Hamilton.

He stated that the electors would have a good idea of what makes a good President, and that their voting separately would insulate them from demagogues and foreign meddling.

But less than a decade after the adoption of the Constitution, the EC degenerated into a rubber-stamp body. With the election of Donald Trump, a demagogue who was happy to accept foreign support, its failure became complete.

 

[Elixir]

The people want change enough the politicians will follow.

"The people" are not a bloc. A minority party has been in control of congress for ten years and the whole government for four years.
Regardless of what the majority of "The People" want, the politicians are going to do whatever they can to perpetuate their own power.

 

[lpetrich]

I checked on what other nations do to see if any other nation uses any system like the US Electoral College.

•  List of electoral systems by country
•  List of countries by system of government
•  Democracy Index
• Parline: the IPU’s Open Data Platform | Your one-stop-shop for information about national parliaments - from the International Parliamentary Union - has very comprehensive data that I could download as spreadsheets
• Regiones y Países — - How is the Head of State selected?

I found that other nation uses the half-assed aggregated and weighted quasi-popular-vote system that the US uses.

Nations with presidential and semi-presidential systems almost all use the popular vote for their Chief Executives. Of these, most of them use a two-round system, with most of the rest using straight first-past-the-post. Sri Lanka uses the Sri Lankan Contingent Vote, a sort of virtual two-round system with ranked ballots (first, second, and third choices). The two-round system is an initial FPTP-like vote, with the top two winners going head-to-head in a second election if no candidate gets a majority.

 

[Gun Nut]

These systems are like the roadster rides at cheesey family-friendly fairs and bottom-shelf amusement parks.
Those are the rides that you get into an old model T ford replica or whatever, and it moves along a track. It has a steering wheel that you can turn. when you turn the wheel the car shifts a little in the direction you turned, but remains constrained to the track. So you feel like you are driving the car a little bit, but it still just goes along the track where the designer intended it to go... allowing the voter (i mean driver) to wiggle a little left or right of the center of the track.

Governments want systems that give them hidden ultimate control that provides an appearance of control by the people.
Fake Choice is political mana from heaven.