Debating Reform - Electoral College Abolition

Context: Material provided by Gary L. Gregg prior to publication by SAGE publications. The chapter addresses the argument against abolishing the Electoral College, presenting an opposing view.
Formal Resolution: Resolved, the Electoral College should be abolished (CON).

Reference to Federalist No. 68 by Alexander Hamilton.
- Hamilton suggests that the Electoral College is a fundamental part of the constitutional system that has received little criticism historically.
Changing Perceptions: The Electoral College has often been misunderstood and unappreciated over time.
Opposition: Persistent campaigns against the Electoral College exist in educational institutions, media, and Congress.
Historical Endurance: Despite opposition and numerous proposed amendments to abolish it, the Electoral College has remained intact and functional.

Key Point: The Electoral College works effectively by having successfully elected forty-five presidents, with varying degrees of success among them (good, great, and few disasters).
Notable Presidents: Mention of successful leaders such as Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan.
Democratic Stability:
- The political system is described as democratic and stable, characterized by free and honest elections.
Legitimacy:
- Observations on how elections end with legitimate presidents and governable regimes, using the example of the contentious election of 2000 where the Electoral College continued to be upheld.

Argument Against Abolition:
- Opponents want to prioritize political equality, insisting all votes should count equally. However, Gregg argues that this principle is not the sole basis of the American political order.
Inequities in Representation:
- Examples of unequal representation: The U.S. Senate treats all states equally regardless of population size.
- Connecticut vs. California representation.
- Congressional districts vary in sizes; comparison of Montana (900,000) to Wyoming (560,000).
- The Supreme Court’s role undermines pure popular sovereignty and political equality.
System Quality: American democracy balances various goods, leading to a stable political environment.
Reality of Elections:
- Elections are conducted fairly, dedicated to counting votes on a state-by-state basis, preserving reasonable political equality within states.

Amendment Efforts:
- Numerous proposed amendments in Congress to abolish the Electoral College have failed,
- Some Democrats in 2020 pushed for constitutional amendments; others have sought alternative methods outside the conventional amendment process.
National Popular Vote Plan:
- Established by John R. Koza, seeks to reform how electoral votes are pledged by states based on the national popular vote.
- States signing the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact agree to offer their electoral votes to the winner of a national popular vote, disregarding their own vote preferences.
- Requirements: To enact the plan, enough states must join the compact to meet the 270 electoral vote threshold.
- Support Status by 2019: 14 states and the District of Columbia comprising 189 electoral votes have agreed to the compact, raising concerns regarding state and party implications; predominance of Democratic states.

Change Implications:
- Abolishing the Electoral College would drastically change the dynamics of presidential campaigning, affecting electoral strategies.
- Shift from electoral college math to pure popular vote could unpredictably alter campaign trajectory and structure.
Historical Elections:
- The four elections where the popular vote diverged from the Electoral College outcome do not imply failure of the system, as candidates design their strategies based on Electoral College win rather than maximizing popular votes.
Senator Moynihan’s Perspective:
- Abolishing the Electoral College would fundamentally destabilize American politics and constitutionality, reducing the principle of simultaneous majorities.

Political Focus Shift:
- Abolishing the Electoral College could lead politicians to neglect small states and rural areas, focusing primarily on urban centers for votes.
- Current system forces candidates to engage diverse concerns across geographical locations.
Counterexamples:
- Notable disparities from the 2016 elections: while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, her votes were concentrated in urban areas.
- Electoral College incentivizes attention to states like Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Mexico, ensuring all states receive candidates' focus.

Recounts:
- Proponents of abolition often cite the 2000 elections as a failure of the system, but Gregg argues that it illustrates its strengths by maintaining a singular focus during recounts.
- Potential for chaos with a close popular vote, where litigation could occur in numerous precincts, leading to systemic instability.

Abolition Outcome Scenarios:
- Concerns about candidates winning the presidency with a minority of the vote, questioning the legitimacy and functionality of leadership if such a scenario were common.
- The likelihood of political fragmentation increasing with more third-party candidates arising, potentially leading to unreasonable compromises in governance.

Historical Success:
- The Electoral College has served effectively in producing presidents for over two centuries, allowing for balance in political dynamics, representing rural interests, and providing control over electoral disputes.
Preserving the System:
- The proposal argues for the continuation of the Electoral College system, emphasizing its established practice that respects the complexities of American governance.

Federalist No. 68 by Alexander Hamilton.
Historical amendments and public opinions sourced from various political analyses, including the opinion of E. J. Dionne Jr. in the Washington Post.
Further analysis by Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Michael Barone on the Electoral College's implications for American political parties and governance.