Jonah Patel
The Electoral College has been a topic of debate in the United States, with over 700 attempts to reform or abolish it since its inception. The College is established in the Constitution and mentioned in multiple Amendments, and as such, it is argued that abolishing it would require a Constitutional Amendment. This process is challenging, requiring a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. While some have proposed alternatives like the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), others argue that the Electoral College is outdated and undemocratic, disenfranchising millions of Americans. The debate continues, with partisan divisions influencing the discussion.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Can the Electoral College be abolished without a constitutional amendment? | No, it cannot. |
| Number of attempts to abolish the Electoral College | Over 700 |
| Possibility of a successful amendment | Unlikely, due to political polarization and the current two-party system |
| Support for abolishing the Electoral College | 53% of Americans, according to NBC News and the Wall Street Journal |
| Alternative to a constitutional amendment | National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Electoral College is constitutionally mandated
The Electoral College is a system for electing the US president that was established in 1787 by the Founding Fathers. It is mandated by the US Constitution, specifically Article II, Section 1, which outlines how the president should be chosen. The 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, also makes reference to the Electoral College.
The Constitution gives states the freedom to decide how their Electoral College representatives are chosen. However, it does not outline a role for states beyond the appointment of electors. Once appointed, electors are free to vote as they choose.
Due to the Electoral College's constitutional basis, it cannot be abolished without a constitutional amendment. Any part of the Constitution can be repealed or superseded by a constitutional amendment, which requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of state legislatures.
There have been over 700 attempts to reform or abolish the Electoral College, and bills have been introduced in Congress on several occasions. The closest the US has come to abolishing the Electoral College was during the 91st Congress (1969-1971), when a proposal to abolish it received the support of 30 state legislatures. However, the proposal failed to pass in the Senate.
Understanding the Fourth Amendment: Protecting Citizens' Privacy
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court could abolish it
The Supreme Court could abolish the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a system in which voters do not directly elect a president. Instead, they vote for "electors" in each state, with the number of electors determined by the state's population. The Electoral College is established in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and has been the subject of over 700 proposals for reform or abolition since its inception.
The Supreme Court has the authority to interpret the Constitution and could potentially abolish or significantly change the Electoral College. In McPherson v. Blacker (1892), the Court upheld that Congress could set the date for the Electoral College to meet, but also stated that states could determine how electors were chosen. This precedent suggests that the Supreme Court has some leeway in interpreting the Electoral College process.
Additionally, in Ray v. Blair, the Court ruled that the Constitution does not bar political parties from requiring electors to pledge their support to a particular nominee. This ruling further highlights the Court's role in interpreting the Electoral College process. While the Supreme Court has not directly tackled the extent of state enforcement over electors, it may have the opportunity to do so in the future.
The Supreme Court's potential role in abolishing the Electoral College is also shaped by the political landscape. The Electoral College system currently benefits Republicans, as two Republican presidents in the last 20 years have been elected despite losing the popular vote. As a result, Republicans and Republican-controlled state governments are incentivized to maintain the status quo. Any proposed amendment to abolish the Electoral College would need to gain significant consensus, with at least two-thirds affirmation from both the House and Senate and approval from three-fourths of the states.
While the Supreme Court has not directly ruled on the abolition of the Electoral College, it has interpreted and shaped the process through cases like McPherson v. Blacker and Ray v. Blair. The Court's authority to interpret the Constitution and the political dynamics surrounding the Electoral College suggest that it could play a pivotal role in any potential abolition or significant reform of the system.
Amendment Story: The Right to Bear Arms
You may want to see also
Previous attempts to abolish it
The Electoral College has been the subject of numerous attempts to abolish or reform it over the past two centuries. More than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate it, but none have become law.
One notable attempt to abolish the Electoral College took place in 1934, when Congress came within two votes in the Senate of passing a measure to eradicate it. The conversation continued after this near miss, with legislators debating potential reforms.
Another significant effort to abolish the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress (1969-1971), following the contentious 1968 presidential election in which Richard Nixon won the Electoral College but received just 43% of the popular vote. Representative Emanuel Celler (D-New York), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced House Joint Resolution 681, which sought to replace the Electoral College with the national popular vote and a runoff election if no candidate received at least 40% of the nationwide total. The resolution passed the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 28 to 6 and sparked debate on the House Floor, but ultimately failed to pass.
More recently, in 2005 and 2009, US Representative Gene Green (D-Texas) introduced proposed constitutional amendments to abolish the Electoral College and have every presidential election determined by a plurality of the national vote. These resolutions, however, died in committee during the 111th Congress.
In 2016, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California) introduced another proposal to abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct popular election of the President and Vice President. This was followed by a companion resolution introduced by Representative Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee) in the House of Representatives in 2017.
Understanding Colorado's Amendment 71: Voting Power Explained
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
The Electoral College is a constitutionally mandated method of electing the US president, with its basis in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. While the Constitution allows states some leeway to decide how their Electoral College representatives are chosen, abolishing the Electoral College altogether would require a constitutional amendment.
The NPVIC would award all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the overall popular vote across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. This agreement would only come into effect when states with a majority of electoral votes (270 out of 538) have joined the compact. As of August 2025, 17 states and the District of Columbia have joined, accounting for 209 electoral votes or 39% of the Electoral College.
The NPVIC does not eliminate the Electoral College or supersede faithless elector laws; instead, it changes how electors are pledged by the participating states. This compact ensures that the candidate who receives the most popular votes nationwide is elected president.
The idea of the NPVIC gained traction after the 2000 US presidential election, where Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College vote to George W. Bush. This discrepancy sparked studies and proposals for Electoral College reform, with scholars suggesting that a national popular vote could be achieved through state legislative action rather than a constitutional amendment.
Understanding Constitutional Amendment D: What Does it Mean?
You may want to see also
Public opinion on abolishing the Electoral College
The Electoral College system has been a topic of debate in the United States for many years, with a significant number of proposals being put forward to either abolish or modify it. The Electoral College has been criticised for its potential to distort the democratic process and undermine public confidence in American democracy.
Public opinion on the matter has been divided along partisan lines, with Democrats generally favouring a shift to a popular vote system while Republicans are more inclined to maintain the current Electoral College system. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in 2024, 63% of Americans would prefer to see the winner of the presidential election be determined by the candidate who receives the most votes nationally, while around a third (35%) support retaining the Electoral College.
Historically, there has been a shift in public opinion, with a higher percentage of Americans favouring the abolition of the Electoral College in the past. For instance, in 1967, 58% were in favour of its abolition, while in 1981, this number increased to 75%. More recent polls, however, indicate a growing partisan divide, with Republicans becoming less supportive of a popular vote system following Trump's victory in 2016.
The debate surrounding the Electoral College often revolves around the discrepancy between the popular vote and the Electoral College results. In the 2020 election, for example, Joe Biden won the popular vote by over 7 million votes, yet his Electoral College victory came down to fewer than 50,000 votes in a few key states. This has led to concerns about the disproportionate attention given to battleground states and the potential for a candidate who is not favoured by the majority of voters to be elected president.
Proponents of the Electoral College argue that it serves to protect the rights of smaller states and prevents the dominance of large states in presidential elections. They also contend that it reinforces federalism by allowing states to play an autonomous role in the election process. However, critics of the Electoral College argue that it can lead to the overrepresentation of certain groups and that the two-party system already addresses the issue of fractured votes, rendering the Electoral College obsolete.
Missouri Constitution Amendments: Who Approves Changes?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Electoral College is a system in which voters do not directly elect a president. Instead, they vote for "electors" in each state, the number of whom is determined by the size of the population in their respective states.
No. The Electoral College is established in the US Constitution and mentioned in multiple Amendments. Anything in the constitution can only be repealed or superseded by a constitutional amendment.
Yes, there have been several attempts to abolish the Electoral College. Over the last two centuries, there have been over 700 proposals to either eradicate or seriously modify it. The closest that the United States has come to abolishing the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress (1969–1971).
