A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over… and the people restore their government to its true principles.—Thomas Jefferson, June 4, 1798
Even though there’ve been accusations of nefarious voting manipulations here and there when electing state officials, that amount pales when compared to electing the president. The assertion that hair-on-fire Trumpers believe only the top of the ticket was manipulated in 2020 is a bit silly. No one has offered an explanation of how that’s even possible, yet saying it is enough to demand recounts, change voting laws, conduct forensic audits etc. But dang. No matter that ALL the recounts and ALL the courts have confirmed there is no widespread voter fraud (PBS News Hour, PNAS, The New York Times, The Brennan Center for Justice), that hasn’t stopped “people say…” And when people say “people say…” that is sufficient. Facts simply don’t matter. As long as states determine who becomes president, there will be this persistent erosion of trust in the voting process, because “people say”—assuming, of course, the person who wins isn’t a Republican.
So why don’t lawmakers question the results of their own election? Aside from the obvious, here’s another explanation. In elections for every office, every vote counts, and the person who wins is the one with the most votes. Simple. But that’s not the case when voting for president.
There isn’t a national election for president; we have a state-by-state election, but the results only matter in a few of them. Thanks to how electoral votes are awarded (winner-take-all, except in two states), we’re the only democratic republic in the world where the person who came in second place—the person most people didn’t vote for, can actually win the presidency. The fact is, the presidential election only matters in a few key states. “The rest of us are just observers” (commoncause.org/national-popular-vote). In 2020, Politico determined eight states would decide the outcome of the 2020 election. What happened in the other 42? Don’t voters in those states matter? The answer is “no”—because they live in mostly blue or red states. And when results are predictable, it’s bound to decrease voter turnout. Seriously. If you’re a Democrat in Mississippi or a Republican in California, why even bother to vote for president? In fact, in 2020, only 66.8% exercised their franchise, and even that was a record high (Pew Research). We should do better.
With votes in so few states actually in the mix, accusations of hacking, interfering, suppressing, and questioning the outcome will be more likely. But that changes when the number of voters change. At the time of the 2020 election, according to the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Election Project, around 160 million votes were cast. What if every vote counted, regardless of state of residency? What if a vote in Idaho (or any red or blue state) had the same worth as a vote in Florida (or any swing state)? It would be logistically impossible to hack, steal, or otherwise do dirty deeds that would make a difference in outcome when the numbers involved are so massive. Seriously, where would a hacker even begin?
The answer to “people say,” and other attempts to undermine confidence in the voting process, is to use the popular vote to determine the winner of the presidential election. Here’s how to accomplish this within the existing framework of the Constitution, which gives states control over awarding electoral votes (Article 2, Section I). The National Popular Vote Compact is an “agreement among states to guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and D.C.” The bill will take effect when enacted by enough states whose electoral votes total 270. So far, 15 states and DC have signed on to the Compact totaling 195 electoral votes—just 75 votes shy of the number required.
In addition to virtually eliminating the possibility of meaningful vote tampering, there are numerous advantages to electing the president based on the popular vote. Here are a few:
• The new president would reflect the will of the majority of Americans, not the parochial interests of a few states.
• Every vote in every state would be of equal value and every vote would count.
• Knowing every vote mattered, more people would vote. The state of residence would cease to be of consequence.
• Americans support the popular vote; according to a New York Times/Gallop Poll taken in Sept. 2020, almost two thirds, 61% of those polled, support the popular vote. And yes, so does Trump: “The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,” tweet, Nov.7, 2012, and “I would rather have the popular vote…” Fox and Friends, April, 2018.
• Voting fraud accusations occurred, almost without exception, in swing states. When their importance ceases to matter, accusations will decrease and trust in the process will increase. To repeat: no significant voter fraud took place in 2020.
• The divisive division of red and blue states would no longer exist as a factor in presidential elections.
When you think about it, swing states, which represent only a small percentage of the electorate, have done more to influence the final vote in presidential elections than any wannabe felon foolish enough to try to manipulate the vote. Or to put it more succinctly, … “the American Electoral College system sucks” (The Daily Iowan, Sept. 23, 2004).
State legislatures can advance the “we the people” concept of the National Popular Vote and place power back where it belongs…with the people. All of them.
Marsha Shearer is a resident of The Villages and the author of “America in Crisis: Essays on the Failed Presidency of Donald J. Trump.”
