A hispanic man goes to the polls on election day. You know he's losing an afternoon's wages. You know he waits in line longer than the average white man. You know his ballot is more likely to be tampered with than the average white man's. But did you know that at the end of the day, his vote
counts less than a white man's? That's because
Under the electoral college system, a hispanic or latino's vote counts for 92.5% of a white man's vote.
More analysis below, but the short version is that it happens because the electoral college gives disproportionate representation to the small states -- and guess who lives in the small states? I sat down with the 2000 census numbers to calculate it out. Whites, who make up 75.1% of the country, get 75.8% of the electoral vote. Blacks, who make up 12.3% of the country, get only 12.0% of the electoral vote. And hispanics, who make up 12.5% of the country (and are concentrated in big states like CA and TX with fewer electoral votes per capita), get only 11.7% of the electoral vote.
There are a lot of reasons to reform the electoral college. But the fact that it counts hispanic votes less than whites was a surprise to me. If it was a surprise to you too, here's what you can do:
- Write your representative (click here to enter your zip code and contact your Rep) and tell your Rep the Electoral College counts hispanic votes as 92.5% of white votes. Ask your Rep to support HJR 17 and HJR 36 to reform the Electoral College.
- Email the DNC and ask them to look into this issue, as a Hispanic discrimination issue.
- Email Simon Rosenberg's office at the NDN, a champion of Hispanic outreach, and ask them to look into why Hispanic votes count less.
- and of course, if you've learned something in this diary, hit the Recommend button so someone else learns it too.
OK, did all that? Good. Thank you. Now, a little more detailed analysis.
Many of you now are thinking "This is a bullshit diary. The Electoral College does not discriminate against Hispanics -- if a Hispanic moves to North Dakota, he or she gets the same electoral bonus as a white living there. This is just state-ism not racism."
And you're right. To a degree. One might also argue that if working-class Ohioans just moved to Republican neighborhoods they wouldn't need to wait hours at the voting booth. The electoral college obviously was not designed to disfavor minority voters (then again, a black slave was explicitly counted as three-fifths of a man and women were not counted at all, so minority voting issues have changed somewhat). The point here is that today, here, now, in the US, their votes count less - shouldn't we do something about that?
There are also some methodological issues with the numbers I'm giving. First, the population numbers are not registered voters, likely voters, or even eligible voters. It is just raw population numbers, including people under 18, felons, and others who do not get representation. Also, these are pooled "Hispanic or Latino" numbers but they exclude (as I understand it) respondants who self-identified as more than one race (e.g., an individual who is black and hispanic is not included). The census data site uses a bunch of javascript so I can't post a straight link, but here's how you get to it: Go here, then look about two-thirds down the page for the major category "Race and Ethnicity", the sub-category "Race and Hispanic or latino" and click the link "for all states" (with the red table icon beside it).
Some other factoids I gleaned: Women are actually quite well represented by the electoral college. I began this project expecting to find women were underrepresented, because small states like Alaska are male majorities. It turns out that women (above 18) are 51.7063% of the population, and get 51.7067% of the electoral votes. Alaska and Nevada are the only states with more men than women, in Colorado it is perfectly 50-50, and everywhere else women predominate. You go, girls.
The whitest state in the union? What would you guess? Kansas? Nebraska? Some bastion of red-state conservativism? Nope. It's the great state of Maine, with 96.9% whites. Alaska, I was surprised to learn, is almost the least white state (not counting all the snow) -- with only 69.3% whites (native alaskans make up a large fraction of the remainder). The least white electoral votes of all come from DC, which is 60% black.
Finally, a few more words about HJRs 17 and 36. I am new to politics, and don't really understand why these were introduced now or what is happening with them. They were sponsored by Reps. Eliot Engel (NY), Lane Evans (IL), Barney Frank (MA), Alcee Hastings (FL), and Michael McNulty (NY); and Jesse Jackson Jr. (IL) and Barney Frank (MA, again), respectively. Why two resolutions? I guess two HJRs are better than one. These Reps (Frank in particular) don't seem to want to receive e-mail from folks outside their congressional districts. So please go ahead and contact your own Rep if you are interested in electoral reform and fairness to minority voters, and if one of those sponsors happens to represent the CD where your live -- go ahead and show a little love. Hug a Rep today.