Electoral College protects a well-designed political system

Re “Electoral College” undermines democracy” letter by Subhash C. Saxena.

The U.S. Constitution was not drafted to form a democracy. The framers drafted the Constitution to form a representative democratic republic, “the United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican Form of Government...”

The States, not the people, brought the Constitution into being by convention. “The ratification of the Conventions of 9 states, shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the States...." Art VII. That does not scream democracy by the people.

In Art II, when the electors are the topic, it mentions the State about 8 times - and not the people when appointing electors. It does not matter whether “A” gets more votes than “B.” This is exactly what the framers were trying to avoid. A presidential candidate must appeal to the people and diverse interest groups across the nation rather than just a few well populated states. In the Constitutional Convention, the State delegates abhorred democracy; they had seen how it had failed historically. Notice that in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the framers never used the term democracy.

We are all taught in school that our government’s powers are divided into three parts, the legislative, executive and judicial. This is not the only way the powers were divided. The were divided between the federal and state governments. The states lost much of their power with ratification of the XVII amendment, taking away the power of the states to appoint senators who represented the state’s interests, which weakened federalism.

The Electoral College was another way that states interests were to be protected, and the mechanism was federalism. States were going to get a vote. Federalism distributes the powers of government between states and the federal government. This power was very important to the 13 new states. The Delaware delegation was not authorized to vote for a Constitution that didn't give states a vote. That's how important the states guarded their independence and sovereignty.

The Electoral College provides for the small states and other minority interests to be heard. Critics seem to want a national referendum without a care as to how each states votes, completely doing away with federalism and state sovereignty, which was so important to the states. One heavily populated state like California could override the interests of several of its neighboring small states, which have different interests and smaller populations. It’s easier for people to affect policy by going to state governments rather than going directly to the federal government, democratic federalism in action.

Small states, rural areas, and sparsely-populated state interests could be ignored and become victims of direct democratic elections.

The Electoral College is simply a device created by the framers to protect different interest groups, small states, and it also moderated the political system when two major parties developed. I know that there's been third parties, but they tended to die out once their interests faded or were addressed by one of the major parties.

It forces a presidential candidate and the political parties to build coalitions that appeal to the whole country and not just one group of voters or one geographical area. Without a Electoral College, candidates would tend to aim their message at states with large metropolitan areas. Smaller states and interest groups could be more easily ignored. Why would a party want to pick a presidential candidate or campaign in a small state?

Mr Saxena makes the Electoral College's point when he argues about the battleground states. Three of the 10 states he acknowledges - Iowa, Nevada, and New Hampshire all have 6 or less electoral votes - but the candidates had to campaign there because they were so contested.

New Hampshire has only 1.8 million votes, but Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump campaigned hard there for the four electoral votes rather than spend their time in more populous states that they felt had secured. If it were a popular election, all a candidate would have to do is win the heavily-populated states.

With the Electoral College, different states can become battleground states, and the candidates have to be responsive to them. They become important to presidential elections and not just fly over country. During different elections, different states can become battleground states.

Now let’s look at a popular vote for the president, in which the “democracy has been undermined.” We now have at least six parties on deck that would probably or could run a candidate: the Tea Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party, Reform Party, Democrats, and Republican parties. As this becomes the norm, more and more candidates would chance becoming a presidential candidate.

Now one cannot say, “I have to vote for a Republican or a Democrat or waste my vote,” or that I have to vote between the lesser of two evils. There will be other candidates to vote for besides Democrats and Republicans, so your vote isn't “wasted.” Since we have a turnout rate for presidential elections of about 60 percent, now we have the popular vote potentially divided six ways. Split that 60 percent turnout six ways, with probably the Democrats and Republicans getting the most votes. Still, the one that wins the popular vote is split between the five other parties. That’s democracy. But whoever wins is governing with a lot smaller percentage of the vote than with the Electoral College.

Do we have a runoff election?

Where the Electoral College system tries for consensus, different interest groups, and geographical areas, it forces the candidates to visit most states. The referendum-popular vote divides people, states, interest groups and states with large populations because they have more choices, Balkanizing the people and the political system more.

Is that what we want?

The framers tried, and I think successfully, to have a balance between minority protection and majority rule by keeping federalism as a founding principal.

The writer lives in Murrells Inlet.

This story was originally published December 31, 2016 at 3:37 PM with the headline "Electoral College protects a well-designed political system."