270 to Win: Why the Electoral College Needs to Go
The Electoral College: A Relic Undermining Democracy and the Fight to Reform It
The Electoral College, America's indirect system for electing presidents, has become a lightning rod for debates about fairness and representation. While it has determined presidential outcomes for over two centuries, its anti-democratic flaws and near-abolition in the 1970s reveal why this system remains controversial.
How the Electoral College Works
Established in the Constitution, the Electoral College allocates each state electors equal to its congressional delegation (senators + representatives). To win, a candidate needs 270 of 538 electoral votes. Most states use a "winner-takes-all" system, where the candidate winning the state's popular vote claims all its electors. This system means a president can win without the national popular vote—a scenario that's occurred five times, including in 2000 and 2016. Electors meet in December to formalize the result, which Congress certifies in January.
The 1970s Push to Abolish It
The closest the U.S. came to abolishing the Electoral College followed the contentious 1968 election. In 1969, Congress introduced the Bayh-Celler amendment, proposing to replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote system requiring a 40% threshold to win. The House passed the amendment overwhelmingly (339–70), and polls showed 80% of Americans supported it. However, a Senate filibuster led by Southern senators and small-state conservatives blocked it in 1970, fearing it would dilute their political influence.
Why the Electoral College Is Anti-Democratic
Disproportionate Power to Swing States: In 2020, 96% of campaign events occurred in just 12 states.
Minority Rule: Five presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote.
Voter Inequality: A Wyoming voter's influence is nearly 3.6x greater than a Californian's due to uneven electoral vote distribution.
Debunking Myths About Abolishing the Electoral College
Myth 1: "Big states like California and New York would decide elections."
Reality: Under a national popular vote, every vote would count equally. Los Angeles makes up just 2.8% of the U.S. population, and no single city or state could dominate.
Myth 2: "It protects small states."
Reality: Small states are already ignored unless they're swing states. In 2020, Nebraska and Maine—which split electoral votes—saw more candidate attention than most small states.
Myth 3: "It prevents chaos."
Reality: The 2000 Florida recount proved the Electoral College can create crises. A national popular vote would eliminate state-specific disputes.
The Path Forward and LWV's Role
While abolishing the Electoral College requires a constitutional amendment, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact offers a workaround. States totaling 270 electoral votes pledge to award theirs to the national popular vote winner. So far, 17 states (205 electoral votes) have joined.
The League of Women Voters (LWV) has long recognized the anti-democratic nature of the Electoral College and has made its abolition a key part of its platform. The LWV officially supports replacing it with a direct popular vote for the President and Vice President, arguing that the current system distorts campaigns, discourages voter participation in many states, and can elect a president who hasn't won the popular vote. As part of its mission, the LWV actively educates voters about the Electoral College's shortcomings and advocates for its replacement. Through grassroots efforts, public education campaigns, and lobbying at both state and federal levels, the League continues to push for this crucial democratic reform.
The Electoral College's survival hinges on myths and outdated compromises. As the 1970s effort showed, reform is possible—but only if Americans prioritize equal representation over archaic systems. For democracy to reflect the people's will, every vote must count equally, not just those in swing states. The LWV remains at the forefront of this fight, working tirelessly to create a more representative and equitable democratic system for all Americans.
