23 October 2000
CONTACT: David Enrich
(909) 607-7209
true_democracy@yahoo.com

2000 Presidential Campaign Showcases Electoral College Problems

The media frequently refer to this year's presidential election as one of the most competitive in recent history, perhaps since 1960. National public opinion polls reveal a slim difference between the percentage of "likely voters" supporting Al Gore and George W. Bush. Surveys of likely Electoral College vote distributions reveal a similarly tight race, with a handful of between eight and 15 "swing" states poised to determine the election's outcome.

Particularly in a contest as close as this one, the Electoral College warps national politics and could lead to a major constitutional crisis.

• The Electoral College marginalizes voters in non-swing states. Opinion polls indicate that every vote will count in this election. In reality, the only votes that will count are those from a handful of "toss-up" states. Gore and Bush have narrowed their campaigns' focus to states that are still considered to be "up for grabs." Michigan (18 electoral votes), Missouri (11 electoral votes), and Florida (25 electoral votes) have all received disproportionate amounts of attention.
  
  While this is a viable electoral strategy, it has harmful effects on the American electorate. A small group of undecided voters in a small number of "swing" states are the primary targets of both campaigns' visits, outreach, advertisements, and policy announcements for the final three months of the campaign. All other voters -- undecided or not -- are largely ignored. This greatly contributes to America's low voter turnout.
  
  In addition, the Electoral College encourages candidates to focus on issues that appeal to the small group of undecided voters that could tip the balance in "toss-up" states. Candidates are free to ignore important issues of national significance -- including globalization, immigration, gay rights, and drug policy -- simply because they are not of concern to this sliver of the American population.
  
  
• The Electoral College could elect the candidate that loses the popular vote. In recent weeks, Bush has developed a sizable lead over Gore, ranging from three to 11 percent. However, the electoral vote distribution appears quite close. If Gore solidifies his lead in the "toss-up" states that are already leaning toward him (including Michigan, Washington, Oregon, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and New Mexico), his 273 electoral votes will constitute a majority. If Bush does not slip considerably in the next two weeks, he will win the popular vote.
  
  This would mark the first time since 1888 that the president-elect lost the popular vote. Gore would lack a popular mandate, substantially undermining his political efficacy, and Americans would become even more disillusioned with their anti-democratic government.
  
  A less likely -- but more alarming -- scenario is if both candidates win 269 electoral votes. According to a recent Time article, this would happen if: non-swing states vote as expected; Iowa, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, Tennessee, and West Virginia vote for Gore; and Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and Arkansas vote for Bush. The presidential election would be decided in the U.S. House at the beginning of its next session. (Each state delegation gets one vote; Republicans are considered likely to retain control of a slim majority of states, so Bush would probably win.) The Vice Presidential election would go to the Senate. If Democrats win a majority in the Senate, George W. Bush and Joe Lieberman might have to work together for four years.

The Electoral College is outdated and anti-democratic. America deserves truly representative presidential elections, in which all votes have equivalent values. A constitutional amendment replacing the Electoral College with a simple popular vote would be most effective. A more feasible, though less solvent, approach is for individual states to change their election laws (perhaps, where applicable, via ballot initiatives) to award electoral votes on a proportional, not winner-take-all, basis.

CONTACT: David Enrich
(909) 607-7209
true_democracy@yahoo.com