Efforts to reform the United States Electoral College

Last updated

The United States Electoral College was established by the U.S. Constitution, which was adopted in 1789, as part of the process for the indirect election of the President and Vice-President of the United States. The institution has been criticized since its establishment and a number of efforts have been made to reform the way it works or abolish it altogether. Any change would require a constitutional amendment. In 1971, one of these attempts was almost successful in being proposed to the States. An interstate compact proposal, which would bypass the requirement for a constitutional amendment, is at 76% of successful completion as of August 2023.

Contents

Background

The Electoral College was established by Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution in 1789, as a group of people independent of the government to vote on who should become president in the nation's quadrennial presidential elections. They cast legally binding votes which, since 1876, have been based on polling taken in each of the 50 constituent states and Washington, D.C. [1]

Since 1800, over 700 proposals to reform or eliminate the system have been introduced in Congress. Proponents of these proposals argued that the electoral college system does not provide for direct democratic election, affords less-populous states an advantage, and allows a candidate to win the presidency without winning the most votes. None of these proposals have received the approval of two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states required to amend the Constitution. [2]

Criticisms

Deciding the president by electoral vote (rather than directly by popular vote) means that the candidate who loses the popular vote can still win the election. This has been subject to major criticisms in recent years, especially following the 2016 election in which Hillary Clinton received 2.87 million more popular votes than Donald Trump, [3] (a margin of 2%) while Trump received 304 electoral votes and Clinton 227, [4] a margin of 34%.

Faithless electors

Electors are expected to cast their votes in the state in favor of the candidate for which they pledged. There have been cases when electors have failed to do so; called faithless electors. While there is no federal law requiring electors to vote according to a state's popular vote, some states have put in place sanctions on electors who do not. The legality of these sanctions was upheld in 2020 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Chiafalo v. Washington . [5]

At the 2016 presidential election, two faithless electors defected from Trump and five defected from Clinton.

Distribution of electoral votes

The Electoral College allocates votes by giving each state two, and then dividing the remaining votes among the states based on their populations. The two votes being automatically allocated has allowed for disproportional representation of where people live in favor of the smaller states. For instance, California has an estimated 718,404 inhabitants per electoral vote, but Wyoming only has 192,920 per vote. [6] [note 1]

First-past-the-post system

The Electoral College employs a first-past-the-post voting system, where a candidate who receives the most votes wins. Thus, when candidates have high support levels in states with smaller populations and lower support level in more populous ones, such as in 2016, this can have the consequence that the winner of the national popular vote can lose the electoral vote and not be elected president.

Winners of the popular vote in State elections usually get all of the electoral votes, but there is no legal requirement for a state to use a first-past-the-post system. As of 2020, 48 states do; electors in Nebraska and Maine both divide their electoral votes into their congressional districts, allowing losing candidates to still win some electoral votes. [7] Maine adopted this system in 1972 and Nebraska in 1996, however there have only been two occasions in which the winner of either state did not win the state outright. In 2008 in Nebraska, Republican candidate John McCain won all the districts apart from the 2nd, which was won by Barack Obama, who would later go on to win the election. A similar event occurred in Maine during the 2016 election, when Hillary Clinton won all but the 2nd district, which was won by Donald Trump, also the winner of the respective election. Lastly in the 2020 election, Joe Biden won Maine's 1st district while Donald Trump won Maine's 2nd district; and Donald Trump won Nebraska's 1st and 3rd districts, while Joe Biden won Nebraska's 2nd district. [7]

Efforts to reform

District Plan Amendments

There were several attempts in the early 1800s to require states to divide their electoral votes into single vote districts instead of at large. Districts within a state would vote for only one elector, allowing states to split their votes between different candidates. Reformers hoped this would decrease the number of safe states by allowing minority parties to win districts within a state, decrease the role of swing states, and decrease the chance of the winning candidate losing the popular vote.

Many members of the constitutional convention assumed states would choose electors by district instead of at large. One advocate for the amendments, James Madison, wrote in 1823 that the district plan "was mostly, if not exclusively, in view when the Constitution was framed and adopted." [8] Between 1813 and 1824 the Senate approved amendments for the district plan four different times, and the House approved a separate amendment in 1820. None of the amendments managed to pass both houses.

Lodge-Gossett Amendment

Introduced in 1950 and named after its sponsors senator Henry Lodge (R-Massachusetts) and representative Ed Gossett (D-Texas), the Lodge-Gossett Amendment was a plan to allocate the electoral votes proportional to the popular vote. The amendment would have kept the states' electoral votes but eliminated electors. Instead, in each state, the electoral votes would have been allocated in proportion to each candidate's share of the popular vote in that state. There would also have been a nationwide electoral threshold of 40 per cent of electoral votes, with a joint session of Congress acting as tie-breaker between the two top candidates in case none crossed the threshold. The amendment passed in the Senate, with a super majority of 64–27, but failed to pass in the House of Representatives. [9] [10]

Hubert Humphrey's 1956 proposal

Senator Hubert Humphrey in 1956 proposed a compromise where electoral college votes would have been distributed based both on state pluralities and the national popular vote. Two electoral college votes would have been awarded to the candidate with the plurality of the popular vote in each state, and the remaining electoral votes would then have been divided in proportion to each candidate's share of the national popular vote. This proposal, put forward as Senate Joint Resolution 152 in March 1956, passed the Senate but not the House of Representatives.

Delaware v. New York

The state of Delaware in 1966 sought to file a complaint in the U.S. Supreme Court against all other states and the District of Columbia, arguing that the winner-take-all practice of awarding all of a state's electors to one candidate in effect deprived the minority voters of their vote. Delaware argued that the system had spread nationwide because of a kind of arms race where each state wanted to maximize its electoral impact in response to other states adopting the winner-take-all system, and that since the system favored entrenched interests, only the Supreme Court could offer relief. [11] Twelve other states subsesquently joined Delaware in the complaint.[ citation needed ] The Supreme Court summarily refused to hear the case, leaving the question of how to interpret the unexplained denial in doubt. [12]

Bayh–Celler Amendment

The closest the United States has come to abolishing the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress (1969–1971). [13] The presidential election of 1968 resulted in Richard Nixon receiving 301 electoral votes (56% of electors), Hubert Humphrey 191 (35.5%), and George Wallace 46 (8.5%) with 13.5% of the popular vote. However, Nixon had received only 511,944 more popular votes than Humphrey, 43.5% to 42.9%, less than 1% of the national total. [14]

Representative Emanuel Celler (D–New York), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, responded to public concerns over the disparity between the popular vote and electoral vote by introducing House Joint Resolution 681, a proposed Constitutional amendment that would have replaced the Electoral College with a simpler plurality system based on the national popular vote. With this system, the pair of candidates who had received the highest number of votes would win the presidency and vice presidency provided they won at least 40% of the national popular vote. If no pair received 40% of the popular vote, a runoff election would be held in which the choice of president and vice president would be made from the two pairs of persons who had received the highest number of votes in the first election. The word "pair" was defined as "two persons who shall have consented to the joining of their names as candidates for the offices of president and vice president." [15]

On April 29, 1969, the House Judiciary Committee voted 28 to 6 to approve the proposal. [16] Debate on the proposal before the full House of Representatives ended on September 11, 1969 [17] and was eventually passed with bipartisan support on September 18, 1969, by a vote of 339 to 70. [18]

On September 30, 1969, President Richard Nixon gave his endorsement for adoption of the proposal, encouraging the Senate to pass its version of the proposal, which had been sponsored as Senate Joint Resolution 1 by Senator Birch Bayh (D–Indiana). [19]

On October 8, 1969, the New York Times reported that 30 state legislatures were "either certain or likely to approve a constitutional amendment embodying the direct election plan if it passes its final Congressional test in the Senate." Ratification of 38 state legislatures would have been needed for adoption. The paper also reported that six other states had yet to state a preference, six were leaning toward opposition, and eight were solidly opposed. [20]

On August 14, 1970, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent its report advocating passage of the proposal to the full Senate. The Judiciary Committee had approved the proposal by a vote of 11 to 6. The six members who opposed the plan, Democratic senators James Eastland of Mississippi, John Little McClellan of Arkansas, and Sam Ervin of North Carolina, along with Republican senators Roman Hruska of Nebraska, Hiram Fong of Hawaii, and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, all argued that although the present system had potential loopholes, it had worked well throughout the years. Senator Bayh indicated that supporters of the measure were about a dozen votes shy from the 67 needed for the proposal to pass the full Senate. [21] He called upon President Nixon to attempt to persuade undecided Republican senators to support the proposal. [22] However, Nixon, while not reneging on his previous endorsement, chose not to make any further personal appeals to back the proposal. [23]

On September 8, 1970, the Senate commenced openly debating the proposal, [24] and the proposal was quickly filibustered. The lead objectors to the proposal were mostly Southern senators and conservatives from small states, both Democrats and Republicans, who argued that abolishing the Electoral College would reduce their states' political influence. [23] On September 17, 1970, a motion for cloture, which would have ended the filibuster, received 54 votes to 36 for cloture, [23] failing to receive the then-required two-thirds majority of senators voting. [25] A second motion for cloture on September 29, 1970, also failed, by 53 to 34. Thereafter, the Senate majority leader, Mike Mansfield of Montana, moved to lay the proposal aside so the Senate could attend to other business. [26] However, the proposal was never considered again and died when the 91st Congress ended on January 3, 1971.

Carter proposal

On March 22, 1977, President Jimmy Carter wrote a letter of reform to Congress that also included his expression of essentially abolishing the Electoral College. The letter read in part:

My fourth recommendation is that the Congress adopt a Constitutional amendment to provide for direct popular election of the President. Such an amendment, which would abolish the Electoral College, will ensure that the candidate chosen by the voters actually becomes President. Under the Electoral College, it is always possible that the winner of the popular vote will not be elected. This has already happened in three elections, 1824, 1876, and 1888. In the last election, the result could have been changed by a small shift of votes in Ohio and Hawaii, despite a popular vote difference of 1.7 million. I do not recommend a Constitutional amendment lightly. I think the amendment process must be reserved for an issue of overriding governmental significance. But the method by which we elect our President is such an issue. I will not be proposing a specific direct election amendment. I prefer to allow the Congress to proceed with its work without the interruption of a new proposal. [27]

President Carter's proposed program for the reform of the Electoral College was very liberal for a modern president during this time, and in some aspects of the package, it went beyond original expectations. [28] Newspapers like The New York Times saw President Carter's proposal at that time as "a modest surprise" because of the indication of Carter that he would be interested in only eliminating the electors but retaining the electoral vote system in a modified form. [28]

Newspaper reaction to Carter's proposal ranged from some editorials praising the proposal to other editorials, like that in the Chicago Tribune , criticizing the president for proposing the end of the Electoral College. [29]

In a letter to The New York Times, Representative Jonathan B. Bingham (D-New York) highlighted the danger of the "flawed, outdated mechanism of the Electoral College" by underscoring how a shift of fewer than 10,000 votes in two key states would have led to President Gerald Ford being reelected despite Jimmy Carter's nationwide 1.7 million-vote margin. [30]

The Senate took up the debate on a constitutional amendment in 1977. In 1979, it was defeated by a Senate filibuster. [31] [32]

Proposals to abolish

Bills have been made proposing constitutional amendments that would replace the Electoral College with the popular election of the president and vice president. [33] [34] Unlike the Bayh–Celler amendment, with its 40% threshold for election, these proposals do not require a candidate to achieve a certain percentage of votes to be elected. [35] [36] [37]

H.Con.Res.79 — 115th Congress

On September 14, 2017, Congressman Steve Cohen introduced a concurrent resolution asking that the sense of Congress be expressed that: (1) Congress and the states should consider a constitutional amendment to reform the Electoral College and establish a process for electing the President and Vice President by a national popular vote, and (2) Congress should encourage the states to continue to reform the Electoral College process through such steps as the formation of an interstate compact to award the majority of Electoral College votes to the national popular vote winner. [38] On March 14, 2017, Congressman Jerry Nadler asked unanimous consent that he be considered as the first sponsor of the bill. [39]

Several states plus the District of Columbia have joined the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. [40] Those jurisdictions joining the compact agree to eventually pledge their electors to the winner of the national popular vote. The compact will not go into effect until the number of states agreeing to the compact form a majority (at least 270) of all electors. The compact is based on the current rule in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution, which gives each state legislature the plenary power to determine how it chooses its electors.

Some scholars have suggested that Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution requires congressional consent before the compact could be enforceable; [41] thus, any attempted implementation of the compact without congressional consent could face court challenges to its constitutionality. Others have suggested that the compact's legality was strengthened by Chiafalo v. Washington , in which the Supreme Court upheld the power of states to enforce electors' pledges. [42] [43]

As of 2020, 16 states and the District of Columbia have joined the compact; collectively, these jurisdictions control 196 electoral votes, which is 73% of the 270 required for the compact to take effect. [44]

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Each state has a number of votes in the Electoral College equal to two more than its number of representatives in the U.S. House, while DC is granted 3 electoral votes. The number of inhabitants per state is calculated as inhabitants divided by electoral votes.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article Two of the United States Constitution</span> Portion of the US Constitution regarding the executive branch

Article Two of the United States Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government, which carries out and enforces federal laws. Article Two vests the power of the executive branch in the office of the president of the United States, lays out the procedures for electing and removing the president, and establishes the president's powers and responsibilities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1804 amendment regulating presidential elections

The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides the procedure for electing the president and vice president. It replaced the procedure in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, under which the Electoral College originally functioned. The amendment was proposed by Congress on December 9, 1803, and was ratified by the requisite three-fourths of state legislatures on June 15, 1804. The new rules took effect for the 1804 presidential election and have governed all subsequent presidential elections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1913 amendment establishing the direct election of senators

The Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution established the direct election of United States senators in each state. The amendment supersedes Article I, Section 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution, under which senators were elected by state legislatures. It also alters the procedure for filling vacancies in the Senate, allowing for state legislatures to permit their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vice President of the United States</span> Second-highest constitutional office in the United States

The vice president of the United States (VPOTUS) is the second-highest officer in the executive branch of the U.S. federal government, after the president of the United States, and ranks first in the presidential line of succession. The vice president is also an officer in the legislative branch, as the president of the Senate. In this capacity, the vice president is empowered to preside over the United States Senate, but may not vote except to cast a tie-breaking vote. The vice president is indirectly elected together with the president to a four-year term of office by the people of the United States through the Electoral College. Since the passage of the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, the vice president may also be appointed by the president to fill a vacancy, via majority confirmation by both the Senate and the House.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1961 amendment granting presidential electors to the District of Columbia

The Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution extends the right to participate in presidential elections to the District of Columbia. The amendment grants to the district electors in the Electoral College, as though it were a state, though the district can never have more electors than the least-populous state. How the electors are appointed is to be determined by Congress. The Twenty-third Amendment was proposed by the 86th Congress on June 16, 1960; it was ratified by the requisite number of states on March 29, 1961.

An electoral college is a set of electors who are selected to elect a candidate to particular offices. Often these represent different organizations, political parties or entities, with each organization, political party or entity represented by a particular number of electors or with votes weighted in a particular way. The United States has been the only democracy in the 21st century that still uses an electoral college to select its executive president. The other democracies that used an electoral college for these elections switched to direct elections in the 19th or 20th century.:215

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Electoral College</span> Electors of the U.S. president and vice president

In the United States, the Electoral College is the group of presidential electors that is formed every four years for the sole purpose of voting for the president and vice president. The process is described in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Each state appoints electors under the methods described by its legislature, equal in number to its congressional delegation totaling 535 electors. A 1961 amendment granted the federal District of Columbia three electors. Of the current 538 electors, a simple majority of 270 or more electoral votes is required to elect the president and vice president. If no candidate achieves a majority there, a contingent election is held by the House of Representatives to elect the president and by the Senate to elect the vice president. Federal office holders, including senators and representatives, cannot be electors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Birch Bayh</span> American lawyer and politician

Birch Evans Bayh Jr. was an American Democratic Party politician who served as U.S. Senator from Indiana from 1963 to 1981. He was first elected to office in 1954, when he won election to the Indiana House of Representatives; in 1958, he was elected Speaker, the youngest person to hold that office in the state's history. In 1962, he ran for the U.S. Senate, narrowly defeating incumbent Republican Homer E. Capehart. Shortly after entering the Senate, he became Chairman of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments, and in that role authored two constitutional amendments: the Twenty-fifth—which establishes procedures for an orderly transition of power in the case of the death, disability, or resignation of the President of the United States—and the Twenty-sixth, which lowered the voting age to 18 throughout the United States. He is the first person since James Madison and only non–Founding Father to have authored more than one constitutional amendment. Bayh also led unsuccessful efforts to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment and eliminate the Electoral College.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Faithless elector</span> Elector who does not vote for the candidate for whom they had pledged to vote

In the United States Electoral College, a faithless elector is an elector who does not vote for the candidates for U.S. President and U.S. Vice President for whom the elector had pledged to vote, and instead votes for another person for one or both offices or abstains from voting. As part of United States presidential elections, each state selects the method by which its electors are to be selected, which in modern times has been based on a popular vote in most states, and generally requires its electors to have pledged to vote for the candidates of their party if appointed. A pledged elector is only considered a faithless elector by breaking their pledge; unpledged electors have no pledge to break. The consequences of an elector voting in a way inconsistent with their pledge vary from state to state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Popular Vote Interstate Compact</span> U.S. agreement on presidential elections

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential ticket wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elections in California</span> Overview of the procedure of elections in the U.S. state of California

Elections in California are held to fill various local, state and federal seats. In California, regular elections are held every even year ; however, some seats have terms of office that are longer than two years, so not every seat is on the ballot in every election. Special elections may be held to fill vacancies at other points in time. Recall elections can also be held. Additionally, statewide initiatives, legislative referrals and referendums may be on the ballot.

Bills have been introduced in the US Congress on several occasions to amend the US Constitution to abolish or to reduce the power of the Electoral College and to provide for the direct popular election of the US president and vice president.

Electoral reform in the United States refers to efforts to change American elections and the electoral system used in the United States.

The president-elect of the United States is the candidate who has presumptively won the United States presidential election and is awaiting inauguration to become the president. There is no explicit indication in the U.S. Constitution as to when that person actually becomes president-elect, although the Twentieth Amendment uses the term "president-elect", thus giving the term "president-elect" constitutional justification. It is assumed the Congressional certification of votes cast by the Electoral College of the United States – occurring after the third day of January following the swearing-in of the new Congress, per provisions of the Twelfth Amendment – unambiguously confirms the successful candidate as the official "president-elect" under the U.S. Constitution. As an unofficial term, president-elect has been used by the media since at least the latter half of the 19th century, and was in use by politicians since at least the 1790s. Politicians and the media have applied the term to the projected winner, even on election night, and very few who turned out to have lost have been referred to as such.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States presidential election</span> Type of election in the United States

The election of the president and the vice president of the United States is an indirect election in which citizens of the United States who are registered to vote in one of the fifty U.S. states or in Washington, D.C., cast ballots not directly for those offices, but instead for members of the Electoral College. These electors then cast direct votes, known as electoral votes, for president, and for vice president. The candidate who receives an absolute majority of electoral votes is then elected to that office. If no candidate receives an absolute majority of the votes for president, the House of Representatives elects the president; likewise if no one receives an absolute majority of the votes for vice president, then the Senate elects the vice president.

In the United States, a contingent election is used to elect the president or vice president if no candidate receives a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed. A presidential contingent election is decided by a special vote of the United States House of Representatives, while a vice-presidential contingent election is decided by a vote of the United States Senate. During a contingent election in the House, each state delegation votes en bloc to choose the president instead of representatives voting individually. Senators, by contrast, cast votes individually for vice president.

Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case on the issue of "faithless electors" in the Electoral College stemming from the 2016 United States presidential election. The Court ruled unanimously, by a vote of 8–0, that states have the ability to enforce an elector's pledge in presidential elections. Chiafalo deals with electors who received US$1,000 fines for not voting for the nominees of their party in the state of Washington. The case was originally consolidated with Colorado Department of State v. Baca, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), a similar case based on a challenge to a Colorado law providing for the removal and replacement of an elector who does not vote for the presidential candidate who received the most votes in the state, with the electors claiming they have discretion to vote as they choose under the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. On March 10, 2020, Justice Sonia Sotomayor recused herself in the Colorado case due to a prior relationship to a respondent, and the cases were decided separately on July 6, 2020. Baca was a per curiam decision that followed from the unanimous ruling in Chiafalo against the faithless electors and in favor of the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral Count Act</span> United States law governing the counting of electoral votes

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) is a United States federal law that added to procedures set out in the Constitution of the United States for the counting of electoral votes following a presidential election. In its unamended form, it last governed at the time of the 2021 United States Electoral College vote count. The Act has since been substantially amended by the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022.

There is ongoing legal debate about the constitutionality of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in the United States. At issue are interpretations of the Compact Clause of Article I, Section X, and states' plenary power under the Presidential Electors Clause of Article II, Section I.

References

  1. ↑ "Constitution of the United States, Article II Section I" (PDF). 1789. Archived (PDF) from the original on July 10, 2012.
  2. ↑ Neale, Thomas H.; Nolan, Andrew (October 28, 2019). The National Popular Vote (NPV) Initiative: Direct Election of the President by Interstate Compact (PDF) (Report). Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service . Retrieved November 8, 2020.
  3. ↑ "Did Clinton win more votes than any white man in history?". BBC News. December 12, 2016. Retrieved September 9, 2018.
  4. ↑ "Presidential Election Results: Donald J. Trump Wins". The New York Times. August 9, 2017. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved August 3, 2020.
  5. ↑ Shubber, Kadhim (July 6, 2020). "US Supreme Court says states can punish 'faithless electors'" . Financial Times. Retrieved August 3, 2020.
  6. ↑ Bureau, US Census. "State Population Totals: 2010-2019". The United States Census Bureau. Retrieved August 3, 2020.
  7. 1 2 FairVote.org. "Maine & Nebraska". FairVote. Retrieved September 5, 2020.
  8. ↑ Kefauver, Estes (1962). "The Electoral College: Old Reforms Take on a New Look" (PDF). Retrieved December 14, 2020.
  9. ↑ Silva, Ruth (March 1950). "The Lodge-Gossett Resolution: A Critical Analysis". American Political Science Review. 44 (1): 86–99. doi:10.2307/1950349. JSTOR   1950349. S2CID   146857817 – via Cambridge Core.
  10. ↑ FairVote.org. "Past Attempts at Reform". FairVote. Retrieved September 5, 2020.
  11. ↑ "Delaware v. New York (1966)". scribd.com. 1966.
  12. ↑ Duquette, Christopher; Schultz, David (2014). "One Person, One Vote and the Constitutionality of the WinnerTake-All Allocation of Elect e-All Allocation of Electoral College V al College Votes". Tenessee Journal of Law and Policy. 2 (3): 4.
  13. ↑ For a more detailed account of this proposal read The Politics of Electoral College Reform by Lawrence D. Longley and Alan G. Braun (1972)
  14. ↑ 1968 Electoral College Results, National Archives and Records Administration
  15. ↑ "Text of Proposed Amendment on Voting". The New York Times. April 30, 1969. p. 21.
  16. ↑ "House Unit Votes To Drop Electors". The New York Times. April 30, 1969. p. 1.
  17. ↑ "Direct Election of President Is Gaining in the House". The New York Times. September 12, 1969. p. 12.
  18. ↑ "House Approves Direct Election of The President". The New York Times. September 19, 1969. p. 1.
  19. ↑ "Nixon Comes Out For Direct Vote On Presidency". The New York Times. October 1, 1969. p. 1.
  20. ↑ "A Survey Finds 30 Legislatures Favor Direct Vote For President". The New York Times. October 8, 1969. p. 1.
  21. ↑ Weaver, Warren (April 24, 1970). "Senate Unit Asks Popular Election of the President". The New York Times. p. 1.
  22. ↑ "Bayh Calls for Nixon's Support As Senate Gets Electoral Plan". The New York Times. August 15, 1970. p. 11.
  23. 1 2 3 Weaver, Warren (September 18, 1970). "Senate Refuses To Halt Debate On Direct Voting". The New York Times. p. 1.
  24. ↑ "Senate Debating Direct Election". The New York Times. September 9, 1970. p. 10.
  25. ↑ The Senate in 1975 reduced the required vote for cloture from two-thirds of those voting (67 votes) to three-fifths (60 votes). See United States Senate website.
  26. ↑ "Senate Puts Off Direct Vote Plan". The New York Times. September 30, 1970. p. 1.
  27. ↑ Jimmy Carter Letter to Congress , Jimmy Carter: "Election reform Message to the Congress", Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project.
  28. 1 2 "Carter Proposes End Of Electoral College In Presidential Votes", The New York Times, March 23, 1977, Pages 1, 18.
  29. ↑ "Carter v. The Electoral College", Chicago Tribune, March 24, 1977, Section 3, Page 2
  30. ↑ "Letters". The New York Times. March 15, 1979. Retrieved August 18, 2017.
  31. ↑ "Minorities Opposing Senate Move for Abolition of Electoral College", New York Times, July 4, 1979, Section A, Page 9
  32. ↑ John R. Koza, et al., Every Vote Equal (New York: National Popular Vote Press, 2006), xix
  33. ↑ Morton, Victor (January 3, 2019). "Rep. Steve Cohen introduces constitutional amendment to abolish Electoral College". The Washington Times . Retrieved January 5, 2019.
  34. ↑ Morton, Victor (January 3, 2019). "Why Democrats Want to Abolish the Electoral College—and Republicans Want to Keep It". The Washington Times . Retrieved January 5, 2019.
  35. ↑ Cohen, Steve (January 3, 2019). "Text – H.J.Res. 7 – 116th Congress (2019–2020): Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the president and vice president of the United States".
  36. ↑ Merkley, Jeff (March 28, 2019). "Text – S.J.Res. 16 – 116th Congress (2019–2020): A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the president and vice President of the United States".
  37. ↑ Schatz, Brian (April 2, 2019). "Text – S.J.Res. 17 – 116th Congress (2019–2020): A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States".
  38. ↑ "Summary: H.Con.Res.79 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)". congress.govdate=September 14, 2017. March 14, 2018.
  39. ↑ "All Actions Except Amendments H.Con.Res.79 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)". March 14, 2018. Retrieved September 5, 2020.
  40. ↑ "Text of the compact" (PDF). National Popular Vote.
  41. ↑ Neale, Thomas H. Electoral College Reform Congressional Research Service pp. 21–22, viewed November 23, 2014.
  42. ↑ Fadem, Barry (July 14, 2020). "Supreme Court's "faithless electors" decision validates case for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact". Brookings Institution. Archived from the original on July 17, 2020. Retrieved August 4, 2020.
  43. ↑ Litt, David (July 7, 2020). "The Supreme Court Just Pointed Out the Absurdity of the Electoral College. It's Up to Us to End It". Time. Retrieved August 4, 2020. After all, the same constitutional principles that allow a state to bind its electors to the winner of the statewide popular vote should allow it to bind its electors to the winner of the nationwide popular vote. This means that if states that combine to hold a majority of electoral votes all agree to support the popular-vote winner, they can do an end-run around the Electoral College. America would still have its clumsy two-step process for presidential elections. But the people's choice and the electors' choice would be guaranteed to match up every time.
  44. ↑ Susan Sun Numamaker (July 9, 2020). "What Is National Popular Vote Bill/National Popular Vote Interstate Compact & Why Is It Important". Windemere Sun. Retrieved July 14, 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.