Big vs. Small - Who has more clout?

While scholars argue that the electoral college favors, or is advantageous to smaller states, there is also an argument that it favors larger states.  Small states are 'protected' by receiving a proportionally high amount of electoral votes in reference to their populations, arguably giving them more clout.  See Providence Journal article on small state power

Simultaneously though, voters in large states have more power through voting potential, because they have the chance to affect a large amount of electoral votes with their raw vote.  As presidential historian Allan Lichtman explains, "you've got to have a majority 270 votes in the Electoral College to win, and you accumulate them state-by-state, with large states like California having the lions-share of the Electoral College vote."

According to Lawrence D. Longley and Neal Peirce in their book “Electoral College Primer 2000” (not updated in 2004), the states enjoying a higher-than-average advantage in Electoral College that year were the larger ones with the most Electoral College votes.  Note that this finding is in direct opposition to the broad assumption that smaller states have a greater advantage because of the Electoral College.  In descending order, these states were

California – 55 votes

Texas – 34 votes

New York – 31 votes

Florida – 27 votes

Pennsylvania – 21 votes

Illinois – 21 votes

*Vote totals are current for 2001-2010

Longley and Peirce also declared that those states with the lowest amount of clout in the Electoral College are typically those that are argued to be favored by it, including Maine, Montana, Nevada and Utah, each of which has 5 or fewer electoral votes

This data turns out to be extremely hopeful, considering that since only six states enjoy a large amount of influence under the Electoral College system, the remaining 44 might not put up such a fight when it comes to abolishing it.  Perhaps the key comes in convincing the smaller states of the greater advantage to them in abolishing the Electoral College.  Despite the loss of “clout” to smaller states without the Electoral College, they would gain a proportionally balanced advantage by causing the larger states to lose their massively overwhelming advantage in the system.


The Case for Reform

Electoral College Table of Contents


 
August 12th 2007
States Try to Alter How Presidents Are Elected
New York Times

NY Times article on the attempt by California and North Carolina to award their Electoral College votes by congressional district. It draws on FairVote's report on the issue to outline the flaws of this method.

August 9th 2007
Fuzzy Math: Wrong Way Reforms for Allocating Electoral College Votes

August 7th 2007
A Red Play for the Golden State
Newsweek

Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter explains how the proposal to award California's and North Carolina's electoral votes by congressional district are motivated by short-term political gain.

August 6th 2007
GOP eyes California's electoral pie
Los Angeles Times

The author explains why Republicans want California's electoral votes distributed by congressional districts. In a safely Democratic state, such a move will add an additional score votes to the Republicans' tally - the equivalent of winning Ohio.

August 2nd 2007
Votescam
The New Yorker

FairVote board member Hendrik Hertzberg writes on the folly of the statewide and national implications of the congressional district electoral vote scheme.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]