Why Aren’t Constitutional Conservatives Fighting Back Against the Assault on the Electoral College?
After every presidential election there is naturally debate over whether our system of elections is producing outcomes that reflects the will of the people. This is partially due to the fact that our Constitution speaks very clearly to how some aspects of national elections shall work. There are also parts of our election process that are left to states and other entities like political parties.
One institution that gets highly scrutinized is the Electoral College. Voters have a natural tendency to give deference to outcomes that are decided by a majority. This is because the principles of separation of power and checks and balances are being neglected and forgotten.
Those who wrote our Constitution went out of their way to ensure that the power of majorities was limited. The founders were highly skeptical of democratic rule, so they spent months debating and negotiating ways to curb the potential power of democratic majorities.
The Electoral College was an institution created by the Constitution to ensure that presidents would need to get broad support from many states to be elected. Those who created the Electoral College wouldn’t be alarmed at all if a presidential candidate won the popular vote but still lost the election for not getting enough electoral college votes. The founders would see such an outcome as a feature of our constitutional republic and not a bug that needs to be fixed.
I’ve been following a recent movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. While the Constitution established the Electoral College, it didn’t tell states how to determine the allocation of their electoral college votes. In the last few years, several state governments have adopted legislation that says they will give their electoral college votes to whoever wins the national popular vote instead of the popular vote within their states.
In other words. Voters in a state like Iowa could overwhelmingly support one candidate for president and if voters in California decide to vote for a different candidate, then the voters in Iowa would see their state’s electoral college votes go to the candidate California voted for.
It startles me that voters from states with small populations would even consider disenfranchising themselves from national elections like this.
Unfortunately, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has been more successful than I would have expected.
If conservatives, voters in small states, and supporters of the U.S. Constitution don’t start to fight back to protect the Electoral College, then we could soon be facing a situation where the only states that matter for presidential elections are California, New York, Texas, and Florida.
These states already control a huge number of electoral college votes. Do we really need to give them more power?
I hoped and expected to see more resistance. For some reason this is a threat that conservatives either aren’t taking seriously or they believe we’ve already lost.
I’ve decided I can’t stand idly by and watch progressive activists dismantle one of the key protections the U.S. Constitution makes for small states, rural Americans, and those who believe in limited government.
I ran for the U.S. Senate because I believe our country is facing a Constitutional crisis. While I have had many chances to stand up for the Constitution in the U.S. Senate, I need your help to protect the Electoral College from progressive activists who are trying to make it so flyover states have no say in the outcome of presidential elections.
Fortunately we don’t need to pass any new laws to get this done. We don’t have to fight expensive court battles and leave the decision up to a few judges. All we have to do is stop the national popular vote movement in its tracks.
I hope you’ll join me.