Electoral College is debated still

Like clockwork, we face a quadrennial encounter with democrat outrage about our presidential selection process, the “Electoral College.” It doesn’t matter, win or lose, their complaints come fast and furious.
Two  prominent objections to the Electoral College are: the system is steeped in racism and slavery, as illustrated by the Constitutional “three-fifths person” provision for slaves; and, the Founders’ objectives for a non-proportionate electoral representation no longer apply. Let’s look at those concerns.
Slavery is a blotch on America’s exceptional history, but is the electoral process originally and forever bound up in racism? Were the Founders a group of old racist white men? The best way to get to know the Founding cast of characters is to read their comments in debates, official writing, and personal correspondence.
Here’s what President George Washington, a slaveowner, wrote to Robert Morris in 1786: “. . . there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of [slavery]. . .” To his credit, Washington even provided for emancipation of his slaves after his death.  I invite you to search out other Founders’ opinions. You’ll find much of that same sentiment among many of the others.
Regarding slavery and racism, an important development came out of the Constitutional Convention that became known as the “three-fifths compromise.” Slave states lobbied for their slaves to be fully counted as persons in determining the states’ representation in the House of Representatives, but without giving them the right to vote. In contrast, with an eye on reducing the influence of slave states both in the House and in electors for selecting presidents, the northern states didn’t want slaves counted for determining representation.
The eventual agreement was a compromise that had a lot to do with influence and power, and little to do with advancing slavery. In fact, without the compromise to count slaves as “three-fifths” persons for representation in the House and thereby for selecting presidents through electors, there would never have been a Constitution nor a United States. And fortunately, the Constitution set up an atmosphere that led to the abolition of slavery. Sadly, it didn’t happen until Lincoln forced it almost “four score and seven” years later—and even then, racism remained prominent.
One big objection comes from the fact that the number of electors isn’t proportionate to a state’s population. The number of electors equals that state’s total representatives in the House of Representatives, which is proportionate to the population, plus the number of Senators, which is two for each state. The Founders’ expressed a desire to improve the balance among diverse states. They didn’t want the large states to dominate the governance of America.
That’s virtually the same reason that’s argued today. Proponents of the Electoral College don’t want a highly populated state such as California to be as dominant in a presidential election as it would be under a direct popular vote process. If one party has total political control of a handful of high population states, that could collectively determine the outcome of a presidential election if based on popular vote totals.
Look at the numbers in 2016. Hillary Clinton continually reminds us that she won the popular vote count. Removing only California from the results would have left Trump with a popular vote advantage of almost 1.5 million votes. And removing just nine democrat “population center” states leaves Trump with almost a seven million vote victory—over 20 percent of votes cast in those remaining 41 states.
I believe the results we see are worthy because the needs of states with relatively large area but lower population, often referred to as “flyover” country,” must not be minimized. They contain the bulk of our natural resources and produce much of our food. A voter in Queens, N.Y. can’t be expected to give rapt attention to the interests of a farmer in Iowa.
My conclusions: The Founders weren’t a group of old racist white men; the fact that the Founders arrived at the three-fifths compromise actually reduced the representation and influence of slave states in legislation and presidential selection; and, the original presidential electoral process had a goal of improving balance among diverse states, which remains relevant today.

Lake Mills Graphic

204 N. Mill Street
Lake Mills, IA 50450

Office Number: (641) 592-4222
Fax Number: (641) 592-6397

Sign Up For Breaking News

Stay informed on our latest news!

Manage my subscriptions

Subscribe to Breaking News feed
Comment Here