Counterpoint: preserving the Electoral College

International Social Science Review, Fall-Winter, 2007 by Maria Lynn McCollester

Third, though many might argue that the Electoral College is outdated and that the Founding Fathers could never have imagined the expansive nature of the United States, it has survived and thrived since 1787, adapting to the ever changing physical and political landscapes of the United States. With its aim of selecting a "national president," the Electoral College is designed to require that a candidate campaign and appeal to the entire nation, not just one faction or region. As political scientist Michael Uhlmann points out, "No candidate can win without a broad national coalition, assembled state by state yet compelled to transcend narrow geographic, economic, and social interests." (13) By eliminating the Electoral College, this could easily change. A candidate would no longer be required to seek support throughout the country. Candidates would simply have to get enough votes in enough similar regions to acquire a majority. This could be accomplished by focusing only on the most populous areas of the nation. A candidate could then completely ignore the needs of less populated regions entirely. This would mean even less power and a weaker voice for some minority groups--including racial and religious minorities in rural populations and small states. The Electoral College therefore does not diminish the equality of people's votes; instead, it provides safeguards against candidates only catering to the numbers. (14) One can argue that the same states seem to always be either "red" or "blue," and thus the candidates are not catering to the entire nation anyway. Yet, the Electoral College at least encourages candidates to look beyond those states that their party traditionally wins and attempt to switch the "color" of those states every election year. Should they not do so, it could cost them dearly. (15) Without a national process for electing presidents such as the Electoral College, the voice of the "little person" will simply vanish from the process.

The Electoral College has endured much criticism over the years. Critics have offered scathing depictions of the system, arguing, in general, that "the American way of electing presidents is antiquated, impractical and dangerous." (16) They do not understand the simplicity of the Electoral College and the protection that it provides against the domination of government by one source of power. It is understandable why some would believe popular election to be the necessary system for so democratic a nation. Though it may not be direct, the Electoral College best protects the principles of the entire citizenry of the country. No system of electing a president will ever be perfect, but the Electoral College has protections for all people, from all backgrounds, which is more important than the appearance of a direct popular election. Without the Electoral College, the United States will become a less federalist nation, the two-party system would collapse, and there would no longer be any requirement for a national president. In its Constitution, the United States embraces the concepts of freedom, liberty, and justice. The Electoral College is just one manifestation of those values, but it is a crucial one that deserves our continued support.