This is NOT 1776!
Is It Time to Rethink Our Method of Democratic Governance?
This is NOT 1776!
Introduction
For many years I have been concerned about the gridlock in government created by “runaway” political dogmatism. I have also been concerned about the election of Presidents who receive the win through the electoral college, but do not have the support of most voting Americans. Our founding fathers believed in majority rule, and several of them (including Washington, Hamilton and John Adams) cautioned about allowing political parties to have too much power. The system created in the 18th Century worked for many decades, but it has had its flaws. Today those flaws need to be addressed. The following is a proposal to change parts of the system that may be flawed.
The Electoral College—The Facts
Consider the electoral college and the issue of minority presidencies. There have been forty-six presidents, of which five presidents have been minority presidents—John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, George W. Bush, and Donald J. Trump. A majority president is the candidate who gets the largest percentage of support from the electorate, not the candidate who gets over 50% of the vote. Each election of a minority president has an interesting story. The election in November 2024 may also produce a minority president.
The system as we know it was a compromise by our founding fathers in 1788. (Prior to 1788 the President was elected by the Congress.) The young nation was clearly a representative democratic republic. A modification of this concept was the compromise between giving the people the vote but keeping the actual election in the hands of electors. The unstated belief was that many voters did not have the knowledge to cast intelligent ballots. Instead, the better educated electors would select the president. Voters would cast ballots for a candidate, but the actual vote would go to the electors who pledged to vote for a specific candidate.
This flawed system has survived despite over 700 attempts to amend this part of the Constitution. Just four years ago, following the January 6 demonstration at the Capitol, a Gallop poll found that 61% of Americans favored abolishing the Electoral College. This raises the question:
Why should we abolish the Electoral College?
First, the Electoral College of the 21st Century gives too much power to a few “swing states.” Over the years certain states have garnered the reputation of being either Republican or Democratic. For instance, California and Illinois are generally considered to be in the Democratic camp. Texas is seen as Republican. There are eleven states labeled as “swing” states, meaning the vote could go either Republican or Democratic.
A democracy says that each person has a vote. In America there are more than 330 million people. Of that number, 230 million are eligible to vote. The actual turnout has ranged from a low of just over 50% to a high of just over 80%. During the past two elections, turnout has been around 60%. That equates to around 138 million actual votes. Yet only 538 electors actually vote for the president. That is not a good ratio! Even Donald Trump has said, “I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million vote and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win”
Why Should We Keep the Electoral College?
On the other hand, a popular vote has its problems. Some voters and areas of the country do not have an equal chance to be heard. There is a belief in a “tyranny of the majority.” There is some merit in the belief that farmers and factory workers might not be heard over the urban demands of those in metropolitan areas. For example, while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, it is worth noting that she did not win the rural vote. Her popular vote was bolstered by urban areas on the east and west coasts. Perhaps electoral votes should be divided by the percentage of the popular vote that each candidate receives?
In an argument mentioned earlier, the founding fathers were wary of the electorate. They feared an uneducated and uninformed voter. The belief, as expressed by Alexander Hamilton, was that better educated electors would ensure that only qualified individuals would be elected President. Given the current presidential contest, some may question whether Hamilton’s belief is always true!
Congressional Reform
The other issue is a dysfunctional Congress. The current Congress has gotten very little accomplished, primarily due to partisan politics. The ‘party” is more important than the interest of the country. Or perhaps each party believes that only they have the right answer to what is good for the country. John Adams warned early leaders that political parties might one day be a hindrance to good government. Unfortunately, he was correct.
It doesn’t have to be that way. The government established by the founding fathers has stood the test of time. The answer to the gridlock is relatively simple. Each person elected to Congress needs to listen to others’ opinions regardless of party affiliation. A good debater understands both sides of an argument. When this understanding occurs, a middle ground is often discovered.
In researching this piece, I was surprised to learn that the House has been looking at reform for several years. And the Senate has actually enacted reforms. Although, they have not gone far enough to solve the problems. For example, in 1975, the Senate changed the rules on voting to end a filibuster from two-thirds to three-fifths. Later, the exempted judicial and executive branch nominees from filibusters. In the House, the seniority system on committee chairs was replaced by a majority caucus vote. In 2019 the House created a Select Committee on Modernization of Congress, co-chaired by a Republican and Democrat. The purpose of this committee was to bring Congress into the 21st Century. The Committee mission was renewed in 2021, and the co-chairs established the “Fix Congress Caucus.” The Committee recommended over 200 reforms which have been adopted.
Despite the reforms the idea that Republican and Democrats are enemies has held sway over the past decade. Opposing members are viewed as combatants rather than colleagues. National problems are lost to party politics.
Derek Kilmer, a Democrat and co-chair of the committee, has proposed a way to improve rapport among House members. He has recommended a bipartisan retreat at the beginning of every Congressional session with mandatory attendance. In addition, he has suggested that all committee meetings start with a planning session so that members can begin to trust and respect each other. He hopes that it will allow members to get to know each other as people, not an enemy from some other party. Unfortunately, Representative Kilmer is retiring!
Kilmer’s proposed plan is perhaps impossible, as most recent House and Senate leaders seem to think their job is to keep the parties apart so that there is a clear distinction between goals. This is an important election strategy. Recent leadership seems to prove this point.
Conclusions
Both problems can be solved. However, the will of the people must be more forceful than it is today! Unfortunately, our founding father’s concern over the lack of an informed electorate is still an issue today. Many Americans either fail to take an interest in learning about political issues, or only listen to a very focused and small number of information sources. An amendment to the Constitution to change the Electoral College system is only possible when Americans vote for representation who want this to happen, and then casts ballots at state elections to support the amendment. The dysfunction in Congress should be viewed the same way. Americans need to recruit and elect people who share their values. Political parties shouldn’t be making the selections. This year’s election cycle is representative of voters focused on a small number of biased sources which are working to make their candidate your choice!
Thoughts from the Middle by Robert J. Fischer 