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


 
March 9th 2006
Electoral College Drop-Out
Los Angeles City Beat

Prominent columnist Andrew Gumbel voices support for the National Popular Vote Campaign; he criticizes the problems of the Electoral College and the lack of campaigning in most states.

March 5th 2006
At long last: A truly fair popular presidential vote?
The Houston Chronicle

Nationally syndicated columnist Neal Peirce, an Electoral College and popular vote expert, quotes FairVote chairman John Anderson in an op-ed hopeful for reform.

March 1st 2006
We vote for a fairer way to decide national elections
Chicago Sun-Times

A ringing endorsement from the Chicago Sun-Times of the National Popular Vote campaign, of which FairVote is a lead coalition member.

February 28th 2006
The Electoral College: A new approach to an increasingly serious problem
Sacramento Bee

The Electoral College's violations of political equality make the case for presidential election reform particularly pressing, according to FairVote's Rob Richie and Ryan O'Donnell.

February 27th 2006
Count 'Em
The New Yorker

New Yorker columnist Hendrik Hertzberg touts merits of National Popular Vote plan.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]