Skip to content
Search AI Powered

Latest Stories

How the NYT Thinks We Can End the Electoral College

How the NYT Thinks We Can End the Electoral College

Despite efforts to pressure electoral college members to switch their votes to honor the popular vote count, electors chose to seat Donald Trump, a result Congress will ratify next month. While efforts were fervent, they were always unlikely to persuade enough electors to switch their votes. In fact, there has never been a revolt by the College in its entire history.

The New York Times issued a widely circulated op-ed yesterday favoring an end to the electoral college. Although Trump, it wrote, “won under the rules… the rules should change so that a presidential election reflects the will of Americans and promotes a more participatory democracy.” The electoral college, it wrote, “is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin.” Through the infamous three-fifths compromise, slaves counted towards the electoral college votes of each state, but they were not allowed to vote.  Thus, while a direct popular vote would have placed the Southern states at a disadvantage, the electoral college advantaged them. In large part because of this, seven out of eight of the first U.S. Presidents hailed from a Southern slave-holding state, Virginia, which commanded a massive number of electoral votes.


There have been many calls for an end to the electoral college. But yesterday’s editorial was noteworthy for its support of a specific mechanism to get around the electoral college: The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

As the Times noted, there is a very serious effort underway to effectively undo the electoral college that would not require so-called “faithless” electors or an actual Constitutional Amendment. For some time, critics (now joined by million of petitioners) have argued that the Electoral College is an archaic institution that leaves America out of touch with modern democracies, where the national popular vote winner is always simply the winner. But getting a Constitutional Amendment approved has always seemed highly unlikely. After all, the three-fourth majority of states needing to ratify it include many that would lose power without the college.

Christopher Suprun, a Republican member of the electoral college who defected and voted for Ohio Governor John Kasich. (Credit: Source.)

Enter the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which comprises a practical way around this and already has gone more than half the way towards going into effect. Its strategy is simple: convince states with at least 270 of the electoral college votes to agree that their electors will vote for the candidate who won the popular vote, no matter who won the state’s electoral college votes.

According to the initiative’s website, the electoral college’s shortcomings “stem from state winner-take-all statutes (i.e., state laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate receiving the most popular votes in each separate state). Because of these state winner-take-all statutes, presidential candidates have no reason to pay attention to the issues of concern to voters in states where the statewide outcome is a foregone conclusion.” For example, two-thirds of the 2012 general-election campaign events (176 of 253), were in just four states––Ohio, Florida, Virginia and Iowa. “State winner-take-all statutes adversely affect governance,” the site continues. "‘Battleground’ states receive 7% more federal grants than “spectator” states, twice as many presidential disaster declarations, more Superfund enforcement exemptions, and more No Child Left Behind law exemptions.”

Those spearheading the project stress that the NPV would not take effect “until enacted by by states possessing a majority

of the electoral votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538).” The winner under the compact would be the candidate who received the most popular votes from each state (and the District of Columbia). The winner of the national popular vote would receive all of the electoral votes of the enacting states.

Defenders of the Electoral College note that if the popular vote were all that mattered, politicians would only go after vote-rich centers in the cities and ignore rural voters’ concerns because they would gain few votes. Proponents counter that currently that’s already the case, with reliably red states getting little to no visits or efforts by candidates. As things stand, a handful of battleground states gain all of the attention and nearly always hold the key to the election. As the Times notes, the votes of Republicans in San Francisco and Democrats in Corpus Christi are “currently worthless.” Almost 138 million people voted on Election Day, “but Mr. Trump secured his Electoral College victory thanks to fewer than 80,000 votes across three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.”

Electoral CollegeThe president-elect delivers his acceptance speech on Election Night. (Credit: Source.)

The Times has opposed the electoral college for nearly 80 years. In an editorial dated November 9, 1936, the Editorial Board decried the results of the presidential election between Franklin Delano Roosevelt––then running for his second term––and Kansas Governor Alf Landon, a political moderate: “Never before in our political history did the Electoral College appear, on casual inspection, to be so obsolete as in this year's Presidential election,” they wrote. “Governor LANDON received in the neighborhood of 17,000,000 votes, but came out with only eight electoral votes. This disparity seems gross and grotesque.” (The 1936 presidential election is widely considered the most lopsided of all presidential elections in terms of electoral votes.)

“Many Republicans have endorsed doing away with the Electoral College, including Mr. Trump himself, in 2012,” the Editorial Board concludes. “Maybe that’s why he keeps claiming falsely that he won the popular vote, or why more than half of Republicans now seem to believe he did. For most reasonable people, it’s hard to understand why the loser of the popular vote should wind up running the country.”

More from People/donald-trump

screenshot from Fox News of Jackie DeAngelis and Tommy Tuberville
Fox News

Tuberville Now Claims 'Entire Men's Teams' Are 'Turning Trans' To Play Against Women

Alabama Republican Senator Tommy "Coach" Tuberville appeared on Fox News Sunday to again spread unhinged misinformation about transgender athletes.

Speaking with guest host Jackie DeAngelis, Tuberville stated:

Keep ReadingShow less
Screenshot from Last Week Tonight With John Oliver
Last Week Tonight With John Oliver/YouTube

John Oliver Epically Calls Out Awkward Truth Behind Former NCAA Swimmer's Anti-Trans Tirades

On Sunday's episode of Last Week Tonight With John Oliver, the outspoken host devoted the entire program to the attack on trans girls and women who play sports by the GOP.

Oliver began the program saying:

Keep ReadingShow less
man in front of computer code
Chris Yang on Unsplash

Conspiracy Theories That Seem Believable The More You Look Into Them

We tend to think of conspiracy theories as a phenomenon of the digital age. But the internet and mobile devices only allow them to be created and spread faster.

Conspiracy theories have likely been around as long as human civilization has. They are, at their root, just another form of rumors and gossip.

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting, one protestor holding a sign that reads, 'Enough'
Photo by Liam Edwards on Unsplash

People Explain The Pettiest Reasons They Boycott A Specific Brand

No matter how many complaints we file or phone calls we make, some businesses refuse to catch a hint about their bad practices until we hit it where it hurts the most: their bottom line.

While some people will give a business every possible chance before refusing to be a customer anymore, others will boycott over the most petty reasons in existence.

Keep ReadingShow less
Dan Rather; Donald Trump
Theo Wargo/Getty Images; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Dan Rather Goes Viral With Epic 'Turkish Proverb' Aimed At Trump—And It's On Point

Legendary journalist Dan Rather went viral and had social media users nodding their heads after sharing a supposed Turkish proverb about "clowns" aimed at President Donald Trump.

In recent days, the Trump administration has come under fire for the Signal chat scandal, in which top officials discussed war plans in Yemen on an unsecured server; deported a man to El Salvador and defended the move because the man had "traffic violations;" has continued to court controversy over Trump's repeated threats to annex Greenland; has further aggravated relations with Canada; and launched a global trade war that has sent markets tumbling.

Keep ReadingShow less