Keeping the Electoral College is essential

Today’s political rhetoric often offers only a slight difference between fiction and reality. Perhaps nowhere is that more true than in the desire to do away with the Electoral College.

As an example of this thinking, since the last presidential election, a chorus of voices has suggested we abandon the Electoral College and allow the popular vote to form the basis for electing the president. This belief formed the foundation for 14 states — which includes New Mexico — attempting to circumvent the Electoral College by enacting the National Popular Vote, a compact that encroaches on federal and state sovereignty by changing the Constitutional process for electing the president. Only a lack of understanding of the purpose for the Electoral College can account for such an ill-advised belief.

In the last presidential election, the Democratic candidate’s final popular vote over the Republican candidate was 2.8 million. But, in the three states -- New York, Illinois and California -- the popular vote margin of victory for the Democratic candidate was 6.9 million. Without the Electoral College, the votes from just these three primarily blue states would have provided for a Democratic victory. This effectively means the minority voices in the remaining 47 states, while not going unheard, would nonetheless, have no effect upon the election. The voters in those states could have stayed home and the results would have remained the same.

There are many justifications for not eliminating the Electoral College, but the main reason begs this question: Is there equal and fair representation by allowing only the population of a few urbanized states to decide who becomes president?

Without the electoral college, the president would always be elected by the largest, most populous states, leaving the people’s voice ineffective in the remaining states. Further, in the last election, the Democratic candidate won 20 states while the Republican won 30. Are we to ignore the people’s wishes living in 60 percent of the states? Unless we choose to live governed by Oligarchy, the answer must be no.

A fair and representative government should be at the forefront of every citizen’s thoughts. Its very definition was the reason the colonies split with England and fought the American Revolution. It is the very reason we have a bicameral government and the very reason for the Electoral College. Even the purpose in the Declaration of Independence was a complaint that the King denied colonists the right of fair and equal representation. Doing away with the Electoral College eliminates the minority voice, and erodes the right to a fair and representative government.

Understanding the Electoral College demands an understanding of the U. S. Constitution. We are not a democracy, but a Democratic Republic. And for whatever imperfections some may believe it has, America’s Constitution is not only a wonder, but for more than 230 years has allowed our country to thrive and prosper more than any nation in history.

To quote a Supreme Court Justice, “[O]ur Constitution is the greatest charter of human liberty the world has ever known.” To every American, it promises a voice.

Too often, differences arising in understanding the Constitution result from personal preferences and politics rather than understanding the justification for a particular provision. If we desire the voice of every voter to be heard, there is an urgency needed to combat those wishing to eliminate the Electoral College. Our Constitution may not be perfect, but it is far better than anything man has ever conceived and promises equal and fair representation to everyone, not simply to those residing in the most populous states.

Ira Clevenger is a 1964 graduate of Eastern New Mexico University with postgraduate studies at California Luthern University and New Mexico State University. The first seven years of his career were with a CPA firm, with the remainder in management for large agricultural companies. He moved to Las Cruces in 2015.