ELECTORAL COLLEGE FACT SHEET

-        A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THOSE AT THE CONVENTION WHO FELT THAT CONGRESS SHOULD CHOOSE THE PRESIDENT AND THOSE WHO FELT THE PEOPLE SHOULD ELECT THE PRESIDENT

 

-         FAIL SAFE MECHANISM - BASIC DISTRUST OF THE PEOPLE

o       MANY FELT THAT THE PEOPLE WERE INCAPABLE OF EXERCISING AN INTELLIGENT VOTE

-         NOT A PHYSICAL ENTITY

 

-         ELECTORAL COLLEGE MEMBERS WILL MEET IN THEIR RESPECTIVE STATE CAPITALS AND CAST THEIR VOTES FOR THE CANDIDATE WHO WON THE POPULAR VOTE IN THE STATE ON THE MONDAY AFTER THE 2ND WEDNESDAY IN DECEMBER

 

-         WINNER TAKE ALL CONCEPT

o       THE CANDIDATE WHO WINS THE POPULAR VOTE OF A STATE WILL WIN ALL OF THE ELECTORAL VOTES

 

-         UNIT RULE

o        THE ELECTORS OF A STATE DELEGATION WILL VOTE AS A UNIT (AS ONE) WHEN CASTING THEIR VOTES FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT

o       CAN CAUSE A PROBLEM OF THE UNFAITHFUL ELECTOR

§          AN ELECTORAL WHO CASTS A VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE OTHER THAN THE ONE WHO HAS WON THE POPULAR VOTE IN THE STATE

 

-         THE 12TH AMENDMENT CHANGED THE PROCEDURE FOR CASTING VOTES FOR THE PRESIDENT

o       ELECTORAL VOTERS WILL CAST SEPARATE BALLOTS FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT

o       THE CONSTITUTION (NEVER ANTICIPATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLITICAL PARTIES) STATED THAT THE CANDIDATE WHO RECEIVED A MAJORITY OF THE ELECTORAL VOTES WILL BE PRESIDENT AND THE NEXT HIGHEST ELECTORAL VOTE-GETTER WILL BE VICE PRESIDENT

o       THE ELECTIONS OF 1796 AND 1800 AFFECTED THE PASSAGE OF THIS AMENDMENT

 

-         A MAJORITY TODAY CONSISTS OF 270 ELECTORAL VOTES

 

-         COMPOSITION OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

 

o       435 - WHICH REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES

o       100 - WHICH REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF SENATORS

 

o       3 - WHICH REPRESENTS THE VOTES AFFORDED WASHINGTON  D.C. BECAUSE OF THE 23RD AMENDMENT

o       THIS NUMBER COULD ONLY CHANGE WITH THE ADMISSION OF AN ADDITIONAL STATE OR STATES

 

-         THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE HAS ONLY FAILED TO CAST A MAJORITY VOTE 2 TIMES

o       THE ELECTIONS OF 1800 AND 1824

 

-         MINORITY PRESIDENT

o        A PRESIDENT WHO SECURES A MAJORITY OF ELECTORAL VOTES BUT FAILS TO ACHIEVE A MAJORITY OF POPULAR VOTES

-         MAJOR ADVANTAGE

o       THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE HAS MAINTAINED THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM

§         COALITION GOVERNMENT WILL NOT RESULT BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS A CLEAR CUT MAJORITY

§         THIS PROMOTES POLITICAL STABILITY

 

-          MAJOR DISADVANTAGE

o        TECHNICALLY THE PEOPLE DO NOT ELECT THE PRESIDENT

 

-         IF NO CANDIDATE SECURES A MAJORITY OF ELECTORAL VOTES, THE NAMES OF THE TOP 3 VOTE-GETTERS WILL BE PLACED ON A BALLOT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND VOTING WILL TAKE PLACE UNTIL A CANDIDATE SECURES A MAJORITY VOTE (26) EACH STATE REGARDLESS OF SIZE WILL RECEIVE 1 VOTE.


 

PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE METHOD OF ELECTING THE PRESIDENT

-         DIRECT NATIONAL ELECTION

o       ELIMINATES THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE BY CERTIFYING THAT THE WINNER OF THE GENERAL ELECTION WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT

 

-         PROPORTIONAL PLAN

o      WOULD ALLOCATE ELECTORAL VOTES ACCORDING TO THE PERCENTAGE OF POPULAR    VOTES WON BY A CANDIDATE IN A PARTICULAR STATE

 

-         DISTRICT PLAN

o      WOULD ALLOCATE ELECTORAL VOTES BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS WON BY A CANDIDATE IN A PARTICULAR STATE

 

-         BONUS PLAN

o      - WOULD ALLOCATE 102 ELECTORAL VOTES TO THE CANDIDATE WHO SECURES THE POPULAR VOTE THUS ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF A MINORITY PRESIDENT

o      538  +  102  = 640  (MAJORITY - 321)

 

N.B.         ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSALS ALL SEEM TO BE MORE DEMOCRATIC AND EQUITABLE THEY WOULD IN FACT BE MORE UNDEMOCRATIC IN THAT IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 3RD PARTIES WHICH IN TURN WOULD MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR A CANDIDATE TO GET A MAJORITY AND CAUSING THE ELECTION TO   BE THROWN INTO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES