This map should be obsolete
As Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist #68, the Electoral College was supposed to prevent a certain type of individual from elevation to the office of President. The description of the undesirable candidate fits Donald Trump to a T. It’s not just that the EC fail to do what the Founders wanted, it did the exact opposite. It was the EC that put Trump in office.
This alone is enough reason to get rid of the EC before we even get to the way it gives disproportional power to certain voters, sets the country up for minority rule, and opens the door to the type shenanigans that Trump is going through right now with state legislatures. Getting rid of it, though, would require those certain voters to voluntarily give up their disproportional power. I’m not holding my breath for that to happen.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an attempt to circumvent the EC if enough states are willing to sign on and remain on. But a real, permanent solution would require a Constitutional amendment. So, the question becomes — is there a way to fix the EC that has a chance of passing? Would it be possible to get the small states on board?
Here’s my idea: we’ll probably never be able to completely abolish the EC. But we might be able to reform it.
The thing that most turns the EC into a disaster is the winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes that’s used in all but 2 states. Instead of pushing an amendment to eliminate the EC, create one to award electoral votes proportionally to the popular vote in each state. Even though the small states would still have disproportionate power, the overall result would be a lot closer to the popular vote than it is under the winner-take-all system. And the fact that the small states wouldn’t be giving up their extra influence could make the idea sellable.
In fact, the small states could see an advantage under this system. Ask voters in Montana or North Dakota when was the last time they saw a presidential candidate from a major party make a campaign stop in their states. Probably never. It’s not that they have a small number of votes. Maine and Nebraska have districts worth one measly vote, and they were both courted in 2020. Montana is ignored because it’s solidly red. The candidates have nothing to gain from spending time there.
Those states also don’t get the kind of special favors that a sitting president like Trump bestows on swing states like Florida. Because why bother? There’s no reason not to take those electoral votes for granted. This is true not only for small states, but large states that are solidly red. Candidates really don’t have to bother with Alabama and Mississippi, because Republicans almost guaranteed to win those states. But that would all change if electoral votes were awarded proportionately.
Furthermore, there would be no longer such a thing as red states and blue states for any practical purpose There would be no incentive for a president or Congress to target red or blue states for punishment or reward. You wouldn’t hear Mitch McConnell opposing a “blue state bailout”, and you wouldn’t have a Republican Congress passing tax laws that penalize voters for living in blue states. The same would be true for red states during times when Democrats are in power. The Federal government would have to answer to both Democratic and Republican voters in every state.
Under the current system Maine and Nebraska split their votes under the congressional district system. It would be important that the reform NOT do it this way. If it were done on a district basis, it would create all the more impetus for extreme gerrymandering. That would be a terrible unintended side effect. Instead, each state should award its electoral votes using a simple mathematical calculation of its popular percentages.
And that leads to another idea: getting rid of the electors themselves as actual people. There’s simply no need for them. And without electors, the issue of faithless electors vanishes, as does the scheme Trump is currently pursuing of trying to get state legislators to select their own slate of electors.
There would be the issue of rounding the numbers, but that’s a minor detail. The numbers could be rounded or not. Rounding would probably be a good idea to prevent haggling over handfuls of votes.
The EC is probably here to stay, but reforming it in this way could eliminate the most problematic aspects of it. And it would do so in a way that could be palatable and even desirable to enough states to ratify a Constitutional amendment.
