The last thing America needs is another disputed election. Pictured: Vice President Kamala Harris. Photo Credit: Kamala Harris/X.
With the end of the election in sight and the polls remaining tight, the possibility of former president Donald Trump winning strikes fear into all the supposed constitutionalists and democracy lovers in America. From the progressive left to the old right, there are many worried that democracy will not recover from another term of the authoritarian orange man. This author is not sure how they think America recovered from his first term, but that’s a story for another time.
Trump has disqualified himself from the presidency in ways this author has documented many times. This author holds no brief for him and would have been happy to see him fade away from politics after his plot to obstruct the Electoral College certification failed in 2021. His other unusual interpretations of constitutional practices unsettle those of us who take time to read it occasionally or at least consult it when issues arise.
Trump could not even give a fifth-grade explanation of why the overturning of Roe v Wade met the constitutional smell test, but fans of his continue to applaud his appointments that made that ruling possible. Fair enough. However, as we encroach upon the 2024 election, a matter of high constitutional principle will be tested and scrutinized again. The popular vote will likely favour Vice President Kamala Harris, but the electoral college decides American elections and has done so for the 236 years that American voters have chosen their president. In 2024 the electoral college may tilt to Trump’s benefit. Swallowing that pill will be bitter for Democrats. Many on the Left have decided that this system no longer promotes democracy and exists as a relic of America’s racist past. Having spent time writing about this on previous occasions, this author will once again take a stab at trying to help people understand the reasons for the Electoral College, its virtues, and why the stubborn efforts to eliminate it are shortsighted and unconstitutional.
REASONS FOR THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
America is a republic, not a democracy. As a republic, laws are made by elected representatives and must comply with a constitution that protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority. The American experiment was formed on this basis. Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and others wanted a loosely joined federation of states with a weak central authority. They never envisioned a strong federal government like the one today whose influence and say extends to funding for projects undertaken in local neighbourhoods.
The establishment of the Electoral College served this purpose dynamically. As a constitutional federal republic, the framers devised a House of Representatives that would be democratically elected based on population. Article One of the Constitution, Section Two states, “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective Numbers…” In Section Three the authors addressed the matter of minority protection when they provided for the selection of two senators from each state, each of whom would have one vote. Regardless of the size of the state, those two senators would have the same impact. With intention, the Constitution’s writers believed serving the union was best accomplished by balancing population advantages with representative adjustments.
Enumerating the Office of the President’s election can be found in Article Two, Section One. The purpose of doing so rested on the idea that larger states could eventually swamp the size of smaller ones and create a geographically unbalanced circumstance favouring those larger areas of the country over the more unpopulated or rural ones. As agriculturalists, they knew that farmers needed much more land than city dwellers. With sparser populations, these areas would have less representation but carry a heavy burden of taxes or responsibility. Ensuring smaller states were protected from the tyranny of massive voting blocks in large cities may seem trite in modern-day America. It wasn’t in the minds of the visionaries who wrote the timeless and ingenious document that has ruled the land for almost a quarter of a millennium. Before tearing down an institutional pillar of the Republic, politicians, journalists, and influencers doing so should consider the historical reasons for its existence.
VIRTUES
Like it or not, the Electoral College has served its purpose well. If California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and a few other states could ensure a candidate’s victory they would campaign only in those states, ensure benefits flowed their way, carve out entitlements for them, and design legislation to curry favour there. Instead, politicians are forced to consider the nation as a whole and must campaign across the country to win electoral votes apportioned to the Congressional districts assigned, which I can remind the reader reflects a population bias. The brilliance of the Electoral College should be celebrated every day in America, not denigrated. Power corrupts not only institutions but minds as well. Those politicians running around America today undermining the Electoral College only do so because it does not benefit them today. If something changed in the next election they would sing a different tune. That is no way to run a country. Short-sighted efforts to ensure continued control, perpetuate power, or destroy opposing points of view characterize a nation intent on destroying its history, disrespecting its founding leaders, and laying the groundwork for the undoing of what has held the nation together for so long. I do not anticipate politicians becoming more cautious about their opinions. It would be nice if they chose to inform them on occasion. The same could be said for the legacy media, social media maniacs, and reckless account holders on X, Instagram, and TikTok.
SHORT-SIGHTED & UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Politicians live from election to election. A nation should endure. Eliminating the Electoral College because the Democratic Party believes itself disadvantaged in 2024 does not play the long game or respect history. In 1996, after the Republican Party suffered a second consecutive electoral drubbing, Democrats believed their new coalition would hold. They envisioned a durable path to victory in presidential elections for decades to come. Former president George W. Bush and Karl Rove upended that with a strong appeal to Hispanics, allowing the GOP to win two consecutive elections. In 2004 Bush defeated Kerry because of Ohio alone even though he won the popular vote by three million. This author doubts Democrats would have spilled any tears about Dubya losing the election if Kerry had pulled out the victory in Ohio.
When the Obama coalition formed Democrats again believed they had struck electoral gold only to be disappointed in 2016 when Trump defeated Clinton in the electoral vote. Switching back and forth between approval of constitutional practices, legislative rules (the filibuster), Supreme Court selections (court packing), and adding new states (DC & Puerto Rico) reflect an effort on the part of Democrats to achieve an edge institutionally. The problem arises when what was once an advantage becomes a disadvantage. When the Court handed down rulings in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s favourable to liberal dogma the Court maintained a glittering reputation. Since conservatives have dominated the Court liberals have become skeptical of the justice’s usefulness, motives, or rulings. Given time these matters tend to shift. Liberals, intent on restoring their power and solidifying their control do not want to wait. The same can be said of the electoral college which one day may hand the Democrats a victory while losing the popular vote.
The founders of the American government deliberately created a grinding and slow system. Changes would occur gradually and not be easily introduced. The aim was stability with checks and balances to prevent the majority from overwhelming the minority. From my vantage, the Constitution works well. Playing games with it would be shortsighted and unconstitutional. Over the next few weeks prepare to hear a lot of complaints about the Electoral College from the Democratic side. This author hopes they follow the Constitution and certify the electoral vote. The last thing America needs is another disputed election.
Dave Redekop is a retired elementary resource teacher who now works part-time at the St. Catharines Courthouse as a Registrar. He has worked on political campaigns since high school and attended university in South Carolina for five years, where he earned a Master’s in American History with a specialization in Civil Rights. Dave loves reading biographies.
