Electoral College: The making of an American president     11/8/2000 Yesterday was Election Day. Yet, in an unprecedented moment in history, the election remains just “too close to call.” Tension and frustration mount during this 11th hour as we await the results of the recount from Florida, the deciding factor in who will win the White House. In what some call the “presidential cliffhanger,” Vice President Al Gore is the projected winner of the nationwide popular vote, while Texas Gov. George W. Bush is the projected winner of the electoral vote—and thus the winner of the presidency. Meanwhile, many American citizens are scratching their heads, trying to understand this thing called the Electoral College. At each election, reporters ask Americans their opinions of the Electoral College. People more often say they would prefer the president’s election solely by the popular vote. Indeed, a November 8 ABC News poll revealed 69 percent of people think the popular vote should determine the presidency. But few really understand why the Founding Fathers developed the Electoral College. If the presidency were based solely on a popular vote, the candidates would logically focus their attention on high-population urban areas and ignore low-population areas. In this sense, the Electoral College serves as a safeguard against an inherent inequity. In devising such a system, the Founders “wanted to ensure that the president reflected a broad national consensus” in the words of National Review. Here’s how the process works. First, the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants each state and the District of Columbia at least three electors. For example, Florida has 25 electoral votes because it has two senators and 23 representatives. Next, the political parties in each state submit to the chief election official a list of individuals pledged to their candidate for president who will serve as the state’s electors. When people vote, they are actually voting for electors pledged to their favorite candidate. Historically, electors have kept their pledges. To win the electoral vote, a presidential candidate must receive 50 percent plus one of electoral votes cast. Since the current number of electors is 538, it requires 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. In all but two states, including the District of Columbia, laws ensure a winner-take-all system: Whoever wins the popular vote in a given state wins all of that state’s electoral votes. Gov. Bush won the popular vote in Texas so he won all of Texas’ electoral votes. As a precaution, citizens should not become over-confident if their candidate wins the nationwide popular vote. History has shown that such a candidate could lose the electoral vote and thus lose the presidency. It happened in 1888, when Democrat Grover Cleveland received 90,596 votes more than Republican Benjamin Harrison, but lost the electoral vote to Harrison, 233-168. If Bush and Gore had tied in the electoral votes, the newly elected House members would have taken a state-by-state vote, with each state’s members deciding which candidate would get their state’s vote. The Senate would decide the vote for vice president, with each senator voting individually. Another scenario arises when neither candidate receives a majority of the electoral votes. In that case, each state in the House gets one vote. The candidate getting votes from at least 26 states would become president. If the House were unable to reach a majority, then the new vice president would serve temporarily as acting president, pursuant to the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. If there is no president or vice president, the Speaker of the House is next in line. If Bush or Gore wins the popular vote but loses the presidency, American citizens will likely increase their opposition to the Electoral College. If polls that show Americans dislike the Electoral College are right, however, ignorance of the people may give a better opportunity for a popular push to do away with the Founders’ vision. Eliminating the Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment, which must be ratified by three-fourths (38) of the states. While some say the Electoral College is “undemocratic,” the truth is that ours is a republican form of government, not a democracy. We are governed by a set of laws, not by majority rule. The framers of the Constitution, with ingenuity and foresight, designed an “intricate” system of electing a president that would ensure the broadest representation of the country as possible. Meanwhile, the whole country awaits the results with much anticipation. USA Today (11/08/00) reports Florida’s election officials are recounting nearly 6 million votes. They are expected to finish by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday. This does not include an unknown number of overseas absentee ballots that could take 10 days to arrive and be counted.