The corrosiveness of this system isn’t just a contemporary issue. James Madison, called the dad of the Constitution, was really disturbed by the state winner-take-all rule, which he thought about among the central flaws of the Electoral College as it took shape in the early 19th century.As Madison composed
in an 1823 letter, states utilizing the winner-take-all rule”are a string of beads”and fail to reflect the real political variety of their citizens. He did not like the practice a lot he called for a constitutional change disallowing it.It’s not only liberals who understand the issue with winner-take-all. In 1950, a Texas representative named Ed Gossett took to the flooring of Congress to vent about the unfairness of a system that gave some voters more influence in the election than others, exclusively because of where they live. New york city was at the time the country’s largest and crucial swing state, and the citizens who decided which way it swung were racial and ethnic minorities in big metropolitan areas.”Now, please comprehend, I have no objection to the Negro in Harlem voting and to his vote being counted,”Gossett stated, “but I do feel bitter the truth that both parties will invest a hundred times as much money to get his vote and that his vote is worth a hundred times as much in the scale of national politics as is the vote of a white male in Texas. “”Is it reasonable, is it honest, is it democratic, is it to the very best interest of anybody in fact, to place such a premium on a couple of
thousand”votes from racial and ethnic minorities, he went on, “simply because they occur to be found in two or 3 big, commercial pivotal states?”2 a century after James Madison’s letter, the state winner-take-all guideline is still debilitating our politics and synthetically dividing us. Every 4 years, 10s of millions of Americans’votes magically disappear before the genuine election for president takes place– about 6 weeks after Election Day, when 538 electors convene in state capitals across the nation to cast their votes for president. “Blue”states provide all their electors to the Democrat, no matter the number of Republicans elected their candidate; vice versa in the “red”states.Given that eliminating the Electoral College is not on the table at the minute, for a variety of reasons, the best option would be to do what Madison tried to do more than 2 centuries earlier:
get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws. That can be accomplished through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an arrangement amongst states to award their electors to the candidate who wins the most votes in the entire nation, not just within their borders. When states representing a majority of electoral votes join, the compact works, making all Americans ‘votes relevant, and all of them equivalent to one another. The popular-vote winner then automatically becomes president.