Expel the Electoral College

An anti-partisan argument for the popular vote

Nov 05, 2024

Do not adjust the screen settings on your device.

This is still

Yes, yours truly, aka The Anti-partisan, is coming out of the box this week quoting the gospel of Church Blue. Getting rid of the Electoral College has been a standard in the Democratic hymnal ever since Al Gore got more than half a million more votes than George W. Bush in 2000 but lost the presidency on a contested electoral vote count. It shot to near the top of the party’s wish list after Hillary Clinton got almost three million more votes than Donald Trump in 2016 but also lost on electoral votes.

So how does Mr. Don’t-Take-Sides-Solutions-Not-Victories explain taking this side and giving the Democrats such a big win on this issue? First, because ideas that make things better are worthwhile solutions no matter who proposes them. Second, the outcome of the proposal may not be as favorable for their side as Democratic partisans expect.

Electoral College expulsion

As covered, “Electoral College” is something of a trigger term for Democrats. Yet, despite the party’s collective, seething hatred for the institution, they are powerless to do anything about it because it’s safely ensconced in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. And given that elected Republicans generally support the institution, and the country is split near-even politically, opponents of the college don’t have anywhere near the necessary federal or state support to pass an amendment to kill it, which would take the backing of 2/3 of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, as well as 3/4 of the states (38).

Many Republicans actually do favor a popular vote system—46%, according to Gallup, not far from the 53% who still prefer the Electoral College. Altogether, 63% of Americans want to scrap the college, including 80% of Democrats.

For many people, switching to a popular vote-based system is a matter of simple fairness. Some may even frame it in terms of justice.

But, it should be noted that there are certainly worthy defenses of the Electoral College:

Making presidential candidates collect electoral votes from a geographically diverse coalition of states compels them to support policies that appeal to diverse, geographical regions.
Regions in battleground states throughout the U.S. depend on the economic infusion that happens when campaigns and phalanxes of reporters start making frequent stops in their areas during campaign season. These trips are crucial to businesses in these communities, especially those in the food-and-beverage and hotel sectors.
The electoral map has cultural significance. It’s the political version of the March Madness-style “big board” used to track the advancement of Division 1 college basketball teams through the NCAA tournament. Just as millions of Americans fill out tournament brackets every year and monitor them obsessively, millions pore over U.S. maps with the states outlined every four years and use online electoral vote calculators to figure out potential combinations of states that will get their side to 270 electoral votes and the presidency.

The Superseding Principle

But, a single counterargument outweighs the collective force of the above and any other cases for keeping the Electoral College. Simply put, instituting a popular vote system would likely increase voter participation to an unprecedented and previously unimaginable level.

In a typical U.S. presidential election, electoral votes in more than half the states are essentially awarded before a ballot is cast. Known as red (Republican) and blue (Democratic) states, most of them haven’t been won by a presidential candidate from the other party in decades. Adding to their one-sided character, 80% of U.S. states (40) are also “trifecta states,” meaning that one party holds both houses of the state legislature and the governor’s office. A lot of these are also “one-party states,” meaning that Republicans or Democrats not only control all the machinery of state government but hold all the congressional offices too.

These circumstances can’t help but decrease voter turnout. As much as our cultural messaging inundates us with the notion that the act of voting is sacred and noble, for a lot of people, that idea is outweighed by basic pragmatism. People know that if they reside in a definably blue or red state, their votes aren’t going to affect most election results.

Sure, they might be able to impact local races here and there and maybe help swing a town council or school board by a seat or two in one direction or the other. But, in the races that matter, as far as determining the big policies that govern our lives—national and state campaigns—the unfortunate fact is that these folks’ ballots are largely irrelevant. In practical terms, their votes don’t count.

However, if winning individual states didn’t matter, everybody’s vote would matter, at least at the presidential level. That would likely lead to an exponential increase in turnout.

Incidentally, this means that popular vote wins in an electoral college system don’t carry much weight. There was much ado about the popular vote losses of Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016. Democrats and many media members fumed that Gore and Clinton would have won under a “fair system.” Many in the party and press also believe that the Electoral College is the only thing standing between Democrats and enduring political dominance.

But, these claims ignore the fact that tens of millions of new voters would likely come out under a popular vote system. And no one knows how they would vote.

If given the chance, they would probably vote anti-partisan. Because if Republicans or Democrats were offering these folks something substantive enough, they would vote now. Even in deep blue and red states, they would vote, if either party gave them something worth voting for–something that isn’t just more of the same scorched earth, power-obsessed, we’re-right-they’re-wrong politics.

Anti-partisanism offers something new, something pure, something worth their vote. And it’s these new voters who would be the key to coloring the map purple. They are the ones who would turn America anti-partisan.

Portions of this post have been adapted from my book The Anti-Partisan Manifesto: How Parties and Partisanism Divide America and How to Shut Them Down. Buy the book here. For the time being, it is only available digitally. To read, download the Kindle app to your phone, your iPad or tablet, your Kindle device or your computer.