The League of Women Voters and Abolishing the Electoral College

The Electoral College plays a pivotal role in the United States’ Presidential elections. It consists of 538 electors, representing the total number of U.S. senators and representatives, plus three additional electors for the District of Columbia. Each state’s allotment of electors is equal to its total number of Congressional members. During Presidential elections, voters in each state cast ballots for a slate of electors pledged to a particular candidate. The candidate who receives a majority of electoral votes (270 out of 538) wins the Presidency.

Established by the Founding Fathers as a compromise between election of the President by Congress and by popular vote, the Electoral College continues to spark debate about its relevance and fairness. Since 1970, the League of Women Voters has been advocating for the abolishment of the Electoral College. In its place, the League believes that the President should be elected by a direct, popular vote. 

Critics, including the League of Women Voters, contend that the Electoral College undermines democratic principles by allowing a candidate to win without the popular vote. They argue it distorts campaign strategies and marginalizes voters in non-swing states. Furthermore, the system can perpetuate unequal voting power, where a vote in a state with a small population like Wyoming carries more weight than a vote in a state like California with a large population.

The Electoral College can lead to scenarios where a candidate secures the Presidency without winning the national popular vote, as seen in the recent elections of 2000 and 2016. Such outcomes intensify debates over the Electoral College’s fairness and whether it truly reflects the will of the people. As low voter turnout is already a prevalent issue in the United States, the existence of the Electoral College only adds to the perception by some that their individual vote has no impact on the outcome of the election. 

The League supports the abolishment of the Electoral College for the purpose of ensuring a representative government. The direct popular vote method, where the candidate who wins the country’s popular vote thus wins the election, is the preferred alternative for this system. As Virginia Kase Solomón, former CEO of LWVUS, puts it: “if we want to get to a place of reconciliation and healing in this country, beyond the systems that were set up to give advantage to certain people over others, we need to make sure we are fixing the things that went wrong from the beginning. It comes down to being able to have equal representation, and it comes down to one person, one vote. In a true democracy, that’s what happens.” 

If your local League is interested in receiving LWVUS Electoral College pamphlets to distribute in your communities, email Fiona Schultz (fschultz@lwvma.org).