This show is a rerun

Keep the Electoral College in session

“The electoral college, whatever virtues it may have had for the Founding Fathers, is no longer tenable for American democracy.”

— A Washington Post editorial, earlier this week

Ho-hum. Another presidential election in America, another outcry about the Electoral College. This year, The Washington Post’s editorial board apparently decided that it, too, should seek to change the way the United States chooses a president. Because Donald Trump came way too close to winning reelection. (Yes, that was part of the paper’s editorial reasoning. See nearby.)

We have a friend — in another state — who has been on a roll against the Electoral College in 2020, the year of our American discontent. Needless to say — meaning we really need to say — she lives in a large state. A very large state.

Of course folks in big states would want to get rid of the Electoral College. It would do ‘em good. At least politically. Why, a handful of big states could join together and decide to rotate presidents and vice presidents between them every few years. There’s nothing in the Constitution to prevent it. And flyover country would become exactly that. Even Iowa and New Hampshire would only see the candidates from 35,000 feet above them.

You might still get the occasional George W. Bush (from Texas) or Barack Obama (from Illinois) or Donald Trump (from New York), but you’d never again get a president from Arkansas, Missouri or Kansas.

The Electoral College is condemned by the commentariat these days because folks still remember Donald Trump and George W. Bush. Both won their first presidential terms without winning the popular vote. We remember exactly nobody — nobody — demanding the country do away with the Electoral College in 1992 and 1996 when Bill Clinton won the presidency without a majority of the popular vote. As Casey Stengel used to say, you can look it up.

One of the big advantages to the Electoral College is that it divides the nation into subsections. So any recounts can be limited to one jurisdiction. See Georgia this year, or Florida in 2000. Can you imagine the headache of recounting every single one of the 150-plus-million votes? Oh, Lord, spare us.

Actually, the Electoral College does spare us. As Alexander Hamilton once said about it, it’s not perfect, but at least it’s excellent.

Also, imagine the platforms of the two major political parties if only the larger states were needed in an election. There would be no reason to address rural issues. And not just rural issues. How about taxes only for those states with fewer than 10 U.S. representatives! Get on board!

Instead, these days candidates must put together broad coalitions in this federalist system. And reach out to small states. The Heritage Foundation mentions that the Electoral College even legitimizes elections by making the margin of victories large even in close elections. For example, a candidate named, say, Joe Biden could win just 51% of the vote, but still win the Electoral College convincingly.

And if we didn’t have an Electoral College, and the American system threw open the doors to every fringe party, what would happen in those (frequent) years when no candidate gets 50%? A national runoff? Another campaign? Oy.

Why blame the Electoral College when Americans can’t decide on a clear winner? Or maybe when Americans just choose a divided government.

Besides, the Electoral College is tradition! Like contentious elections in this country. Also a tradition in American politics: reacting disproportionately and losing perspective when those elections don’t go your way.