Why a Plan to Circumvent the Electoral College Is Probably Doomed. New York this week became the 10th state (plus D.C.) to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The compact represents a clever workaround to the Electoral College. By signing on, states agree they will award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote (for example, New York would have given its electoral votes to George W. Bush in 2004). However, the measure will only be triggered once states accounting for a majority of electoral votes have joined. There are 538 electoral votes (hence the name of this website), so a majority is 270. The compact’s signatories, so far, total 165 electoral votes. More Politics Here’s the problem: All the states to have joined so far are very blue. As the chart below indicates, the relationship between whether a state has joined the compact and how it voted in 2012 is nearly 1-to-1.
Perhaps the compact can get Delaware, Connecticut and Maine to join, where Obama also won by 15 percentage points or more. National Popular Vote: New York State Climbs Aboard. On Tuesday, the State of New York took a baby step—or maybe a giant leap! —toward making the United States of America something more closely resembling a modern democracy: Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a bill joining up the Empire State to the National Popular Vote (N.P.V.) interstate compact.
As I’ve explained many times (fifty-one, to be exact), N.P.V. is a way to elect our Presidents the way we elect our governors, our mayors, our senators and representatives, our state legislators, and everybody else: by totting up the voters’ votes—all of them—and awarding the job to whichever candidate gets the largest number. And it does this without changing a word of the Constitution. Impossible, you say? No. Quite possible—even probable—and in time for 2020, if not for 2016. Unless you’ve been following this pretty closely, it will surprise you to learn that, before this week, ten states (counting D.C.) had already signed on. A state legislature can “direct” this in any old manner it likes. The Republican Party’s uphill path to 270 electoral votes in 2016 elections. Over the past three decades, the political leanings of many states have shifted dramatically. What once was a sizable Republican advantage in the electoral college has become a decided Democratic advantage.
One way to look at this is by comparing two overlapping 20-year periods. In the first, 1980 through 2000, Republicans won four of six presidential elections. In the second, 1992 through 2012, Democrats won four of six. The first period was the era of Republican dominance — the start of the Reagan era. In the 1980s, many people suggested that Republicans had a lock on the electoral college. Republicans won 16 states in each of the six elections during that period and won an additional four states in five of the six. From 1980-2000, 10 states were up for grabs, with each party winning them three times over six elections. From 1992-2012, Democrats built a base that rivals or exceeds that of the Republicans in the earlier period. What happened? For perspective, I asked William H. The Tarnish of the Electoral College. Now the demographic pendulum is swinging toward the Democrats. Young voters, Hispanics and a more active African-American electorate added states like Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Virginia to President Obama’s winning coalition in the past two elections, and suddenly Republicans are the ones complaining about a broken system.
They’re right, too, just as the Democrats were a generation ago. The Electoral College remains a deeply defective political mechanism no matter whom it benefits, and it needs to be abolished. We say that in full knowledge that the college may be tilting toward the kinds of candidates we tend to support and provided a far more decisive margin for Mr. Obama earlier this month than his showing in the popular vote. There should be no structural bias in the presidential election system, even if population swings might oscillate over a long period of decades. But 76 years later, the system continues to calcify American politics. Election maps. Email: Thanks to everyone who wrote in about the maps. I've received so much email that I may not be able to reply to everyone, but I much appreciate all your comments and suggestions.
Many of the things people have been asking about are answered in this list of frequently asked questions. I have new cartograms of the 2016 election results. You can find them here. Election results by state Most of us are, by now, familiar with the maps the TV channels and web sites use to show the results of presidential elections. Click on any of the maps for a larger picture The states are colored red or blue to indicate whether a majority of their voters voted for the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, or the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama, respectively.
We can correct for this by making use of a cartogram, a map in which the sizes of states are rescaled according to their population. Here are the 2012 presidential election results on a population cartogram of this type: Election results by county. Electoral Maps 1972-2008. The 2012 US Presidential Election The electoral map shown below depicts the results of the 2012 U.S. presidential election in which Barack Obama defeated Mitt Romney. Obama carried 26 states and 51.1% of the popular vote. Democrat: 332 Barack Obama Republican: 206 Mitt Romney. 112th Congress (2011-2012) Fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/82468.pdf. The Electoral College: Enlightened Democracy. The mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system . . . which has escaped without severe censure. . . . I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent. -- Alexander Hamilton The United States is quickly approaching its first presidential election since the eventful election of 2000.
The story of that election is still fresh in our memory. George W. Bush won the presidency, but only after weeks of controversy in Florida. His win made him the first President in more than 100 years to attain the White House despite a popular vote loss, and it led to renewed calls for abolition of America's unique presidential election system, colloquially referred to as the Electoral College. Some academics have criticized the Electoral College for years. The Constitution's Election Process Modern-day American presidential elections are governed by the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Electoral College tie possible in Obama-Romney race. The likelihood that Obama and Romney each net 269 electoral votes is not so far-fetchedA CNN analysis finds eight scenarios that could yield a Electoral College tieIn the event of a tie, each state's House delegation casts a single vote for presidentIn 1825, the House awarded the presidency to John Quincy Adams Washington (CNN) -- An Electoral College tie.
It's the white whale of American elections: elusive, mythical and never realized. But could it finally happen this year? The likelihood that President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney will each net 269 electoral votes in November, instead of the 270 needed to win, is actually not so farfetched -- and for close observers of the Electoral College system, a tie would set off a wave of constitutional and political mayhem that would make the 2000 Florida recount seem like a tidy affair.
Check out the CNN electoral map and calculator Election results in key states would immediately be subject to legal challenges. Alex Castellanos' electoral map.