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


 
October 26th 2008
It's time to get rid of Electoral College

Editorial in the Houston Chronicle calls for the direct election of the President and asks readers to support the National Popular Vote initiative.

October 26th 2008
Make all votes count

Disenchanted by the recent lack of attention paid to Michigan, Detroit Free Press editor Ron Dzwonkowski argues for the National Popular Vote interstate compact to make Michigan voters relevant throughout every campaign.

October 25th 2008
Blue State Blues

New York Times op-ed columnist Gail Collins addresses the sense of neglect felt by voters in "spectator" states as a result of the Electoral College and the winner-take-all method of allocating states' electors.

October 23rd 2008
The Electoral College And Other Hazards
National Journal

Interview with FairVote Executive Director Rob Richie on prospects for electoral reform.

October 17th 2008
October 17th Update on Presidential Visits and Spending

FairVote's press release shows that in the "Swing States of America," candidates ignore a majority of states and follow voting patterns of 2004 Presidential Election.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]