The Effort To Neutralize The Electoral College Is Growing

The United States has prided itself on being a pattern for democracy for the world to follow. Unfortunately, it has a very flawed system. In fact, the United States is the only democracy in the world in which a president can be selected without winning a majority of the votes cast by citizens. In all other democracies, the person who wins the most votes is elected.

The United States has an archaic system in which the popular vote doesn't count as much as the Electoral College (which assigns votes by state according to the number of senators and representatives in that state). This system has resulted in two presidents being selected since 2000 that did not win the most votes -- George W. Bush in 2000 (who got about a half-million less votes than Al Gore), and Donald Trump in 2016 (who got about 3 million less votes than Hillary Clinton). The chart above shows the Electoral College votes in 2016.

To be blunt, our system of electing a president is broken. Like in every other democracy, the candidate with the most votes should be the winner. Unfortunately, our Electoral College system was written into the Constitution. And to change the Constitution requires the approval of three-fourths of the states (38 states). That is very unlikely to happen, so there is a movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC).

The NPVIC takes a different tactic. Instead of abolishing the Electoral College, it changes how those votes are distributed. A state's Electoral College votes would be awarded to the candidate who wins the most votes nationwide (instead of who won a particular state). This has a better chance of success since it would not require three-fourths of the states to approve. It would only require enough states to approve to equal 270 electoral votes.

Prior to this last week, eleven states (and the District of Columbia) had passed NPVIC laws, which would start as soon as enough states do the same that equal 270 votes. They are California (55), D.C. (3), Hawaii (4), Washington (12), Illinois (20), Maryland (10), New Jersey (14), Connecticut (7), Rhode Island (4), Massachusetts (11), Vermont (3), and New York (29). They have a total of 177 electoral votes.

Last week, two new states joined that group -- Colorado (9) and Delaware (3). That brings the total to 189 electoral votes. And it looks like New Mexico (5) will soon join, bringing the total to 194. That means only states with 76 more electoral votes will be needed.

This could happen, and it needs to. It is ridiculous for the United States to preach democracy and one-man, one-vote -- and then not follow that themselves. If we are really a representative democracy, the the person who gets the most votes should be the winner.