University panel examines presidential election
By: Jeff Milgram
If butterfly ballots and pregnant chads weren’t enough to make this year’s presidential election too close to call, just wait until you see what a "faithless elector" can do.
Faithless electors – and it might only take a few if the electoral vote is close – could send the presidential election to the House of Representatives, according to participants in a panel discussion Wednesday on "The Electoral College and the 2000 Election" at Princeton University’s Robertson Hall.
Five Princeton University faculty members gathered to discuss the Electoral College, that faceless body of 538 electors who actually decide who gets to be president and who are suddenly the center of attention because of the close vote in Florida to decide who gets that state’s 25 electoral votes.
Faithless electors are not philandering members of the Electoral College, panel members explained. They are electors who don’t follow the script, voting not for the candidate they are pledged to but for the other guy.
So, if Texas Gov. George W. Bush is awarded Florida’s electoral votes and Vice President Al Gore wins in New Mexico, the count would be 271-267 in favor of Mr. Bush, according to Christopher L. Eisgruber, faculty fellow in Princeton’s Program in Law and Public Affairs. "If two electors change their votes, it’s a different winner," Dr. Eisgruber pointed out.
But in the more than 200 years since the U.S. started to elect presidents, there have only been about eight faithless electors," he said.
Keith E. Whittington, assistant professor of politics, pointed out that "faithless electors are not a serious problem."
|
‘We actually elect slates of electors. They are free to cast their vote for whomever they like.’ Christopher L. Eisgruber |
But who’s to say? Who ever thought that the English language would be enriched by such words as "butterfly ballot," "chads" and even "pregnant chads"?
Butterfly ballots were used in Palm Beach County, Fla. They opened up like butterfly wings, but the names of the candidates were seen by some voters to be misaligned with the hole that was supposed to be punched.
That brings up chads, which are the tabs sometimes left when the ballot is punched. A pregnant chad is one that is forced back but not pushed through, leaving a bump rather than a hole.
While neither Gov. Bush nor Vice President Gore sees much humor in the election, panel members did.
"By my count, and this is subject to a recount, this is the ninth day of the presidential election," Dr. Eisgruber opened the discussion.
He said none of the five panelists "have made a career writing articles or books on the Electoral College."
Dr. Eisgruber pointed out that the U.S. Constitution says nothing about the election of the president, and that states have control over who represents them in the Electoral College.
A state is given one electoral vote for each of its members of the House of Represdentatives and for its two senators. In every state but Maine and Nebraska the winner of the popular vote is awarded all of the state’s electoral votes.
"We actually elect slates of electors," Dr. Eisgruber said. "They are free to cast their vote for whomever they like."
In general, the panelists thought the Electoral College was a good thing, or at least, not a terrible thing. They pointed out that the Electoral College prompts candidates to campaign in all states, not just the most populous.
They also said it is not unusual for the winning candidate in the popular vote to win a plurality but not a majority. President Bill Clinton failed to win a majority in both 1992 and 1996, panel members pointed out.
"The mere fact that we may get a president second in the popular vote is not a reason to scrap the system," Dr. Eisgruber said.
But, Dr. Eisgruber said, the Electoral College system does render some voters irrelevant, especially in states that are so dominated by one party the way New York is by Democrats and Texas by Republicans.
He also said that regional third parties fare better in the Electoral College system than national third parties.
Joan C. Tronto, visiting research scholar at the University Center for Human Values, said neither candidate will escape from this election unscathed.
"Neither candidate will have much of a mandate to govern," she said.
She was critical of Florida election officials for "disenfranchising thousands of voters" who cast their ballots, mistakenly, for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan when they thought they were voting for Vice President Gore.
She also criticized the electoral system.
"The Electoral College violates a fundamental principle – every vote counts the same," she said.
She also urged Congress to make presidential ballots uniform throughout the nation.
Jonathan Riley, another visiting scholar at the University Center for Human Values, also urged Congress to standardize local voting regulations. He suggested Congress use some of the budget surplus to buy electronic voting computers, which are difficult to tamper with and make it impossible for voters to vote twice.
Dr. Whittington said, "It would take a much bigger crisis before there is a significant movement to change the electoral system."
Melissa S. William, visiting professor at the Center for Human Values, suggested the easiest way to reform the Electoral College is to make every state follow the lead of Maine and Nebraska, which awards electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins in each congressional district. The presidential candidate who carries the state in the popular vote gets the state’s two additional electoral votes.
For example, a candidate who wins the popular vote in a state while winning six of its 10 congressional districts would receive six electoral votes for the district victories and two for the statewide win.
She said this system still requires candidates to campaign nationally while lessening the power of any particular state to control the entire election.
Dr. Williams said this reform would not require a constitutional amendment and is not a radical change from the present system. Dr. Riley said such a reform would be unattractive to some states, which would have to "give up power and influence" over the electoral system.
The program ended as it had begun, with humor.
"I’ve been asked if we’re going to make a prediction on the outcome of the election," Dr. Eisgruber said. "It’s too close to call."