George W. Bush was elected to the U.S. presidency twice, but won the popular vote once. (Courtesy photo)

George W. Bush was elected to the U.S. presidency twice, but won the popular vote once. (Courtesy photo)

What is the Electoral College and why do we have one?

It’s not representative of the actual electorate, nor was it designed to be when it was formed over 200 years ago

What is the Electoral College and why do we have one?

By Christopher B. Dolan and Matthew D. Gramly

Donald from Belvedere asks: Is it possible for a candidate to become president of the United States without winning the nationwide popular vote?

Dear Donald: Yes, it is possible. In fact, that has happened twice in the very recent past. Over the last seven presidential elections, the Republican candidate has only won the popular vote a single time, in 2004, yet has become president three times. George W. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 but became president. He won the popular vote in 2004 and was re-elected. Donald Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 by more than 3 million votes yet became president anyway.

How could this be? The answer is because we have something in the U.S. called the Electoral College. We do not elect presidents based on who won the nationwide popular vote. Candidates have to win the popular vote in individual states. Once they do, that state’s electors will cast ballots in favor of the candidate who won that individual state. Each state is awarded a number of electors equal to the number of members that state has serving in the House of Representatives as well as their two senators. Currently there are 538 electors; 100 for members of the U.S. Senate, 435 for members of the U.S. House of Representatives, and three representing Washington D.C., which is not currently a state. The electors are the people who actually cast binding ballots to elect each president.

It sounds convoluted and seems to be contrary to the ideal of “one person, one vote” but the Electoral College actually dates back to the founding of our nation and is enshrined within the Constitution.

During the late 1700s our founding fathers never intended for the election of a president to be left to whoever won the popular vote of the combined states or colonies that existed at that time. They did not trust the electorate to be wise in making this decision; our founding fathers viewed everyday Americans as unsophisticated, illiterate, and frankly, not smart enough or sufficiently emotionally stable to be trusted with choosing a president.

Another concern was that more populous states (in the North) would overrun the will of lesser populated states (in the South) with every election, merely because more people who could vote lived in the North. Remember, back in the late 1700s the only Americans eligible to vote were white adult males who owned property. Women and slaves did not have the right to vote. There were simply more eligible voters in the North than there were in the South and the Southern slave states feared a never-ending procession of presidents who were unsympathetic to owning slaves.

At the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1803, James Wilson, representing Pennsylvania (a non-slave state), proposed that each president be elected by direct popular vote. James Madison (hailing from the slave state of Virginia) countered that Southern slave states would not agree to such a system because the almost 750,000 slaves in Southern states at that time couldn’t vote. Describing this, Madison wrote, “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.”

He was complaining that Southern states would not get a number of votes representative of their actual populations because slaves could not vote – even though those same states were the ones preventing slaves from being able to vote. Southern states, however, received credit for the slaves populating their states when calculating the population to determine the number of representatives representing each state in Congress. In this calculation, slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person, which is stated in the Constitution. Thus, the compromise to protect the slave states’ interests was reached and the Electoral College was formed.

Given this antiquated system, designed at least in part to preserve slavery in Southern states, it is entirely possible for a presidential candidate to lose the nationwide popular vote yet win the Electoral College.

Here is how that works currently: Electors are not apportioned equally based on each population, largely because of the Senate. Each state gets two U.S. Senators, regardless of population, and thus at least two electors. Wyoming has a population of less than 600,000 people and has two senators for a total of three electors. California has 40 million people, two senators, and just 55 electors.

The Electoral College is not representative of the actual electorate, nor was it designed to be when it was formed over 200 years ago. When the Electoral College was created slavery was still legal and practiced by half the country, slaves could not vote, women could not vote. Many argue that it is time for the Electoral College to be abolished. In the age of Black Lives Matter it is difficult, at best, to argue that it should be preserved.

Christopher B. Dolan is the owner of the Dolan Law Firm. Matthew D. Gramly is a senior associate attorney based in our San Francisco office. Email questions and topics for future articles to: help@dolanlawfirm.com. We serve clients across the San Francisco Bay Area and California from our offices in San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles. Our work is no recovery, no free or also referred to as contingency-based. That means we collect no fee unless we obtain money for your damages and injuries.

Election 2020

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

Police Chief Bill Scott on Wednesday said a rebranding and reoganization of the former Gang Task Force amounts to “more than just the name change.” (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
Faced with surge in shootings, Chief Scott reenvisions SFPD’s Gang Task Force

New Community Violence Reduction Team adds officers with community-policing experience

Stores including Walgreens and Safeway are required to pay their employees additional hazard pay under a city ordinance that is currently set to expire later this month. (Shutterstock)
Grocery workers could gain additional weeks of $5 per hour hazard pay

San Francisco will vote next week on whether to extend a law… Continue reading

The fatal shooting of San Francisco resident Roger Allen by Daly City police on April 7 prompted protests in both cities. (Jordi Molina/ Special to the S.F. Examiner)
Daly City approves body-worn and vehicle cameras for police after fatal shooting

Daly City officials on Wednesday approved body and vehicle cameras for police… Continue reading

Baseball Hall of Famer Willie Mays attends an event to honor the San Francisco Giants' 2014 World Series victory on Thursday, June 4, 2015, in Washington, D.C. (Olivier Douliery/Abaca Press/TNS)
Willie Mays turns 90: San Francisco celebrates the greatest Giant

By Al Saracevic Examiner staff writer I couldn’t believe it. Willie Mays… Continue reading

Ja’Mari Oliver, center, 11, a fifth grader at Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy, is surrounded by his classmates at a protest outside the Safeway at Church and Market streets on Wednesday, May 5, 2021 in support of him following an April 26 incident where he was falsely accused by an employee of stealing. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
School community rallies behind Black classmate stopped at Safeway

‘When you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us’

Most Read