Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College

<b>I have decided to embark on a mission to read a number of books on subjects that will be of great importance to the upcoming 2020 US Presidential Election. Many of these will focus on actors intricately involved in the process, in hopes that I can understand them better and, perhaps, educate others with the power to cast a ballot. I am, as always, open to serious recommendations from anyone who has a book I might like to include in the process. <br /><br />This is Book #8 (a re-read) in my 2020 US Election Preparation Challenge.</b><br /><br /><i>First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Jesse Wegman, and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.</i><br /><br />The current selection process for the election of the American president is undemocratic, argues Jesse Wegman in his book. While the Founding Fathers devised the Electoral College to keep the general public from skewing the results with their uneducated choices, they did so at a time that differs greatly from today. This arcane means of election is, as Wegman argues, unknown or misunderstood by many Americans even today. In the early part of his tome, Wegman explores the situation in colonial America that led the Founders to create this buffer system for election of their leader, as well as the arguments at the time. The Founders were not unanimous, though the strongest proponent of direct and popular election of the president—James Wilson—has fallen out of the history books for reasons Wegman presents in Chapter 1. Use of this Electoral College—which allocates all of the state’s electors (totalling the number of their representatives and senators sent to Congress) for the candidate who wins the most votes on Election Day—tended to create situations where certain factions or regionally populous areas could be powerhouses in choosing the winner. Even still, as Wegman argues, the discrepancies between a large state (California) and small one (Wyoming) actually benefits the smaller one in voting power, should one look at the population representation. Throughout history, this Electoral College has created some noticeable issues when it came to choosing the president (1800 being the first and largest soap opera for 200 years). Additionally, there were times (five in total) where the Electoral College winner did not capture the popular vote, meaning fewer people voted for the winner. In layman analysis, Wegman seeks to argue that the Electoral College promoted racial divide and national division, with the power-holders refusing the give up the advantage to level the playing field. However, much as many of the modern versions of racism and xenophobia in American politics, it is shrouded in loosely cobbled together arguments that make it smell more like a rose than the pile of dung it truly tends to be. Wegman explores some of the momentum to abolish the Electoral College, including a constitutional amendment that was begun in the late 1960s, but failed to pass muster in the strong US Senate. More recently, there has been a movement to shift talk to using the popular vote and yet still staying within the constitutional framework in which the Electoral College resides. Making ‘every vote equal’ seems to make sense on some level, but the arcane machinery in use is wrapped in that constitutional bow that many feel is too sacred to touch. After most presidential elections, the Electoral College gets an op-ed or two before disappearing for four years, only to rear its ugly head while many Americans (and people around the world) are baffled with how it all works. Wegman’s arguments are worth exploring and I would recommend anyone with an interest in the political machine of elections seek to read this, preferably before November 2020.<br /><br />Many would say this book was penned as sour grapes after the 2016 election, or even those who are still smarting from 2000. However, even the current POTUS espoused the undemocratic nature of the Electoral College over popular vote in his Tweets from on High, until he realised the College (and the Russians) helped him defeat the system. Wegman argues throughout the book that the College failed masterfully in 2016, by allowing the candidate the system was designed to block to rise to victory. A filtered choice should have kept mob rule from choosing unqualified people to serve, and yet this is what happened. By unqualified, Wegman (and I... even the Founding Fathers) argues that it is someone who rides the waves of the politically detached elector, rather than he/she who is connected to the machinery and understands governing. The chapters in this tome are laid out clearly and allow for a layperson’s understanding, mixing history with modern discussions without going down an overly academic rabbit hole. It seeks not only to offer issues and blatant criticisms, but provides solutions to both sides of the argument. Wegman pulls no punches in arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College, feeling that the people should have the right to choose their president directly. Much like some of the Founding Fathers’ original ideas (male-only suffrage, slavery), the Electoral College was something that worked in late 18th century, but has outlived its usefulness. At a time when most of the Western World prefers the people to speak in as democratic a way as possible, one can hope that America will follow (or lead with a powerful statement) and dismantle or rejig the Electoral College to reflect the popular sentiment. Perhaps then it would truly be collegial!<br /><br />Kudos, Mr. Wegman, for opening my eyes to this topic, which has long been of interest to me. As I sit inside a parliamentary democracy which has its own popular vote issues, I am always open to discussions of electoral reform!<br /><br />Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at: <br /><a target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow" href="http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/">http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/</a><br /><br />A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow" href="https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/248185-a-book-for-all-seasons">https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...</a>

This review is also published here: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow" href="https://medium.com/ballasts-for-the-mind/let-the-people-pick-the-president-by-jesse-wegman-342de2ed467b">https://medium.com/ballasts-for-the-m...</a><br /><br />Jesse Wegman has written a strong and convincing book about why the Electoral College should be abolished and why the president should be elected by the popular vote. Wegman gives a detailed history about the creation of the Electoral College and the context for its creation. The College was the last agenda item on the Constitutional Convention’s agenda. Most of the Framers were ready to go home and the College became a “Frankenstein Compromise” between the Framers who wanted Congress to pick the president and the ones who wanted a direct popular vote. The author introduces readers to one Framer who becomes the spiritual godfather of the popular vote movement, James Wilson. I for one was not familiar with him, he has an interesting backstory.<br /><br />Readers will also learn about the last major effort that almost ended the Electoral College which occurred in 1969/1970 and was led by Senator Birch Bayh.<br /><br />The most effective parts of Wegman’s book is when he turns common talking points or myths about the Electoral College on their heads. For example, the idea that one party prefers the president to be chosen by the Electoral College while the other wants it abolished is not true. Both parties have been in support of keeping the institution at different times. Whichever political party feels that they benefit the most from the Electoral College tends to be its biggest defender.<br /><br />He also covers the National Popular Vote Compact, an Electoral College workaround, where states who represent at least a majority of the electoral votes pledge to send electors who will vote for the national popular vote winner even if that winner did not win the popular vote in their state. Wegman does a great job covering the merits and the deficiencies of the compact and provides a thorough overview of the support it has slowly received over time. It will be an interesting test to see what happens if the requisite number of states sign to the compact and if there's any political fallout from it.<br /><br />Wegman’s chapter dispelling the myths of the popular vote was also particularly strong. He shows, contrary to popular belief, that voters in big cities would not swamp voters in small towns because there are less big city voters compared to everyone else.<br /><br />The strongest argument for moving to a national popular vote, whether that be through the compact or constitutional amendment, is that more voters would participate since they would actually count unlike in the Electoral College winner take all system where if you are a Democrat in Mississippi or a Republican in Massachusetts your votes essentially don’t matter.<br /><br />Wegman’s book is a great historical treatment of the Electoral College and makes a strong case why the popular vote is a better option. It should be read by everyone who thinks they have an opinion of the Electoral College.<br /><br /><i>Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and Jesse Wegman for the free ARC copy in exchange for a honest review.</i>

Never mind the elections of 2000 and 2016, I've disliked the whole notion of the Electoral College since learning about it in civics class in high school. In his book, <i>Let the People Pick the President</i>, Jesse Wegman writes<br /><br /><i>...the Electoral College...too violates the core democratic principles of political equality and majority rule. We may all be eligible to vote for president now, yet all of our votes do not count the same, and the candidate who gets the most votes can lose...<br /><br /><br />There isn't even one single body of electors. Instead, each presidential candidate has his or her own "slate" of electors tapped by local party leaders for nothing but their obedience.</i><br /><br />"Nothing but their <u>obedience</u>." There is no word in the English language more guaranteed to make me run amok, especially in this context. Obedience is for dogs, not for American voters.<br /><br />It turns out I'm not alone in my dislike. Wegman writes<br /><br /><i>If we really thought the Electoral College was the best way to choose a president, we wouldn't have tried to reform or abolish it more than 700 times.</i><br /><br />That's right; in the 243 years of our existence, we have tried an average of three times a year to do away with the Electoral College. Given the fact that said College has now twice in the last two decades utterly abrogated the popular vote, Wegman's book is particularly apropos. He gives us a history of the Electoral College, beginning at the beginning<br /><br /><i>The final product--a system of specially appointed, state-based electors that we today call the Electoral College--was a complicated, half-hearted arrangement cobbled together in the [Constitutional] convention's final days by a few exhausted delegates in a side room of the Pennsylvania statehouse. It ran to 346 words over two paragraphs, the longest, most convoluted clause in the whole charter.</i><br /><br />and points out that the arc of American history bends toward that ideal of "one man, one vote" time and again--in women's suffrage, in black suffrage, in the Second Founding, and more. Eliminating the Electoral College is the next natural step.<br /><br />For those who insist that the Electoral College is a way for small-population states to have an equal voice in our national community, Wegman writes<br /><br /><i>Right now most states, and the voters in them, are forgotten, and for a simple reason: they are not electorally competitive in the presidential race...The last presidential candidate to visit all 50 states in a campaign was Richard Nixon in 1960, and he did it because he'd promised to...the underlying dynamic stays the same: a few lucky states duke it out in the ring while the rest of America sits up in the nosebleeds, passive spectators to the most consequential election in the world's oldest democracy.</i><br /><br />Further, once a president is elected by those handful of states (I'm looking at you, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and let's not forget Florida, which holds up every presidential election because they never learned to count), that president naturally focuses his official attention on those states, to the tune of federal dollars and personal appearances, which alone generates more investments and more attention. The rest of us? Who cares? <br /><br />Thoroughly researched, well written, this book is the Electoral College soup to nuts, and if you aren't convinced by the end of the book that it's past time to end the EC, then you haven't been paying attention. Wegman sums it up here<br /><br /><i>The challenges facing democracy in the twenty-first century are very real, which is why it is all the more urgent that we do everything we can to strengthen the oldest continuously functioning one in the world. A presidential election system that ignores 100 million voters and lets the loser win is not the way to do that. <u>A democracy that doesn't simply tolerate minority rule but encourages it is not a true democracy, and it cannot survive for long.</u></i> [emphasis mine]<br /><br />I read here, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/opinion/trump-senate-acquittal-impeachment.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/op...</a>, that senators -- United States Senators with the full might and majesty of the US Constitution at their backs -- admit privately that they were too afraid of Trump to vote guilty in his recent impeachment trial.<br /><br />In a word, they were <u>obedient</u>.<br /><br />Okay, fine. Time to make them afraid of the voters. Buy this book, read it, and take action.

"Calling [it] into question" by fools who don't understand why the electoral college was created in the first place, to keep the rights of rural states from being abused by the overpopulated states -- the only way to assure that the president represents all states. Without this the country would never have formed and no rural state would have joined the union. Throw it away, and with it the protection given to rural states, and I believe those states will have every right to withdraw from the Union.

So, this book doesn't even come out for another two months and the same troll who's left false reviews on other books about left-leaning political issues is back leaving more troll reviews. With that in mind, I've pre-ordered the book. If you're interested in reading this book, ignore the star rating. <br />- January 15, 2020

This book focuses narrowly on the electoral college and expands on its Constitutional and political history and makes a very convincing case that it needs to be abolished--towards a popular vote. It's a great read.

Jesse Wegman takes a journalistic look at the US election process, showing why the Electoral College is outdated and ineffective. In particular, he takes issue with the “winner take all” method of awarding electoral votes to the winner of a state’s popular vote, which currently occurs in all states except two. This method tends to skew the results and occasionally the winner of the national popular vote does not win in the Electoral College. This has happened five times in our nation’s history, most recently in 2016. <br /><br />Wegman takes the arguments often put forth in support of the electoral college and takes them apart one by one. He notes the ways the world has changed since it was originally conceived and, even then, it was controversial. In addition to the analysis of the Electoral College, he offers a history of the US Constitution, voting rights, and related Supreme Court decisions. The author clearly and cogently states his rationale. It offers food for thought. It will appeal to those interested in US history and politics.<br />

<b>Originally published on my book blog, <a href="http://www.thebibliophage.com/bibliophage" rel="nofollow noopener">TheBibliophage.com</a>.</b><br /><br />Jesse Wegman demystifies the Electoral College in his new book, Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College. No, really. He lays out all the myths I thought were true and some I didn’t. Then Wegman puts every one of them in perspective, clearly and even humorously. I finished the book ready to explain and argue points that previously felt unexplainable.<br /><br />As so many recent political books do, Wegman begins with the post-election fugue state of late 2016. He reminds us of that possible option called “faithless Electors,” who are members of the Electoral College who decide not to vote as expected. Not that it actually went down that way. But for some, it was the most coverage of this voting scheme they’d seen.<br /><br />Despite the reference to 2016, Wegman makes clear that the issues of a Presidential popular vote aren’t partisan. Different folks embraced this change at different times. For example, Democratic Senator Birch Bayh worked on changes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then Democrats tried after the Bush v. Gore election in 2000. Next was Republicans during the eight years Obama was in office. Both sides of the aisle see the downsides to the Electoral College.<br /><br />Part of the reason for its bipartisan nature is that the history of the electoral college encompasses various belief sets. To help readers understand, Wegman uses documents from America’s founding fathers. I remember a fair amount about Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. But James Wilson was essentially new to me, even though he played a big role in this story. The idea of more than just two political parties makes an appearance here as well. As do issues of slave holding, rural voters, and enfranchisement of Black people and women.<br /><br />Wegman also reminds us that virtually every other type of election is won or lost on the popular vote. We elect Governors, Senators, U.S. Representatives, and even school board members that way. It’s only the Presidential election that steps out of the pattern. Some smart folks found a way revise our voting without amending the Constitution. Wegman explains that too. And, his case for letting the people pick the President is airtight.<br /><br /><b>My conclusions</b><br />I read a lot of political books. Rarely are they this down to earth and approachable. If you espouse a popular vote methodology, you must be sure all kinds of people can grasp the change. So, Wegman writes with humor and straightforward explanations.<br /><br />One of the reasons I read this book was because of <a href="http://thebibliophage.com/book-review-indivisible-leah-greenberg-ezra-levin/" rel="nofollow noopener">We are Indivisible</a>, which I read a few months back. In that book, they also make the case for abolishing the Electoral College. But it’s just one portion of a much larger narrative. I wanted more, and Wegman delivered in spades. In fact, I could easily read it one more time to commit the details to memory more completely.<br /><br />As it happens, I listened to the audiobook for part of my reading. Wegman does a great job of using inflection and tone to convey his meanings. His narration makes the details easier to digest.<br /><br />I recommend this to all my political wonk friends and readers. But what I really want is for every voter, or potential voter, to read this. If you feel like your vote doesn’t count, here’s the solution. Plenty of states are on board with the changes that Wegman explains. And isn’t it time our Presidential choice reflect the will of all the people, not just some of them?<br /><br />Pair with <a href="http://thebibliophage.com/book-review-indivisible-leah-greenberg-ezra-levin/" rel="nofollow noopener">We are Indivisble: A Blueprint for Democracy after Trump</a> by Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg. For an alternate political escapade, try <a href="http://thebibliophage.com/book-review-other-queen-philippa-gregory/" rel="nofollow noopener">The Other Queen</a> by Philippa Gregory. It will remind you why our founding fathers rebelled against England’s monarchy.<br /><br /><b>Acknowledgements</b><br />Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and the author for the opportunity to read a free digital ARC of this book in exchange for this honest review.

I believe this author could've simplified his points or <br />organized them better, for a more cohesive narrative. <br />Gave this 3.5 stars of 5. <br /><br />The author Wegman said when the Founding Fathers <br />lived, 95% of those in the US lived in rural areas and <br />they could not have foreseen large cities. <br /><br />Electoral votes were based on each state's population.<br />The framers of the US Constitution gave the Southern <br />states more electoral votes, b/c each slave was counted <br />in the state's population as 3/5 th of a free white man. <br />Electoral College (EC) was supposedly developed, in part, <br />to protect small states. But the winner-take-all aspect <br />of the EC, now in 48 of 50 states, has negated the voice <br />of small states. <br /><br />The reality of US modern politics is a POTUS candidate <br />campaigns in the 12 or so states, with the most electoral <br />votes up for grabs. Often called the ''battleground states." <br />A Democrat knows California is a 'blue state' &amp;locked-up, <br />so why campaign there? Ditto for the GOP in Calif. There<br />have been a few instances when the POTUS victor won the <br />electoral vote but lost the popular vote IE in 2000, 2016. <br />US Constitution indicated the POTUS victor must win at <br />least 270 electoral votes, but it was silent on the popular <br />vote. <br /><br />Wegman discussed some alternatives to the EC such as the <br />National Popular Vote, also ranked-choice voting. He felt <br />the EC contributed to our narrow 2 -party system &amp; allowed <br />politicos to avoid addressing the needs of various groups <br />such as Latinos, African Americans, LGBTQ etc. A GOP strat-<br />egist stated "Right now the Republican Party can exist &amp; <br />flourish as basically a whites-only party. And I think that's <br />incredibly corrosive...." (71% mark). <br /><br />Wegman noted that J. Hudak, a Brooking Institution senior <br />fellow, found that (US) Presidents consistently direct more <br />federal grants and dollars to battleground states than to <br />'safe states.' ( 70% mark).<br /><br />Even though the US population has increased substantially <br />since 1911, the max number of US House members was<br />frozen at 435 since that time.<br /><br />Battleground states in the 2016 POTUS election included: <br />Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida etc. For<br />2020 POTUS election, add these states to those: Arizona, <br />Georgia, No. Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada. Various <br />media outlets believe (my late father's home state of) PA. <br />may decide the 2020 election.

In “Let the People Pick the President,” Jesse Wegman argues for the abolition of the current system for choosing our chief executive: the Electoral College. Wegman’s new book, an expanded version of a New York Times editorial of the same name, is part history, part myth-busting treatise. The author’s bias is noted, left-leaning, and surfaces occasionally, but as he says: the democratic value of “one person, one vote”—codified in Reynolds vs. Sims on March 18, 1963—ought to be nonpartisan. We each want our vote to matter, regardless of who we are, what we believe, or where we live.<br /><br />Through his clear and memorable writing, Wegman guides the reader through the history of the Electoral College: its founding at the eleventh hour as the most-discussed single topic of the Constitutional convention through contested presidential elections and the expansion of voting rights over the next 200+ years. He shows how the Electoral College has served to entrench political power in a two-party system, and introduces some historical figures involved in the over 700 attempts to reform or abolish it.<br /><br />Wegman’s strongest addition mirrors John Koza’s <a href="https://goodreads.com/book/show/11560835.Every_Vote_Equal_A_State_Based_Plan_for_Electing_the_President_by_National_Popular_Vote" title="Every Vote Equal A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote by John R. Koza" rel="noopener">Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote</a>: a section dispelling common myths about the Electoral College. He writes this section as a conversation between himself and a hypothetical family member who is not as familiar with the College, showing how Wegman would address each counterargument to installing a national popular vote.<br /><br />In order to change something, you must first understand it. “Let the People Pick the President” helps to unpack the convoluted US presidential election system. Regardless of your political leanings, you will come away with a better understanding of US history, presidential elections, and the debate around a fundamental democratic question: Who gets to pick the President?<br /><br />Overall: A well-researched and persuasive argument for amending a critical facet of US democracy. ★★★★★.<br /><br />Thank you to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the opportunity to review this book in exchange for my honest review.