Why I Am not Voting

As a New Yorker, I know that my state is a lock, so I’m going to maximize my vote by not using it.

I support Barack Obama for the Presidency, but hope he loses the popular vote. As much as I want the President to complete a second term in office, any loss in legitimacy would be offset by the prospects of replacing the Electoral College (EC) with a national popular vote.

Until now, the EC has disproportionately benefited smaller and more rural states, which tend to be Republican. Only if the American right feels cheated by the electoral system, can we begin to have a meaningful discussion about reforming it.

Americans across the political spectrum are in favor of replacing the EC with a popular vote, but this sentiment does not carry over to our elected leaders. Whereas Democratic officials have publicly expressed support for selecting the President through the popular vote, Republican lawmakers have been fully aware that this would eliminate the disproportionate power given by the EC to their states.

If President Obama were to capture at least 270 electoral votes, but lose the popular vote, all that could change. It would send the American right into such a tizzy that instead of focusing on voter suppression, birth certificates and secret religious convictions, they may turn their ire at the electoral system that elevated the man they so dislike, once again, to the highest office in the land.

This will undoubtedly decrease Barack Obama’s legitimacy as President, should he win, but this is the man that since day one of his Presidency has been deemed illegitimate as their leader and as an American by significant portions of the American right. No electoral mandate will be enough to win these people over. Should conservatives feel that they have lost something as a result of the EC, then, and only then can we begin to reform our electoral process to achieve a popular vote.

I’ve already gone into detail about how and why we should effectively dismantle the current Electoral College system (it doesn’t even require altering the Constitution). Had my vote been from Ohio, I’d be out on the streets, banging my drum. Unfortunately, my vote is from NY – it will not matter – and that is a shame. This is about convincing all (enough) Americans that the popular vote is a good idea.

I know promoting this sort of behavior is risky. It assumes that Obama will win the EC. It assumes he will take Ohio and other key swing states. It assumes that the loss in legitimacy would not make Obama a 4-year lame duck. If, in the end, Romney gets the minimum 270 electoral votes and also wins the popular vote by one vote, I will punch myself in the face and stop blogging.

How to Get Rid of the Electoral College Without Abolishing it

The Electoral College (EC) is a lot like the weather in that, as Charles Dudley Warner said, everybody complains about it, but nobody does anything about it. For once, it seems that people are doing something, but not in the conventional manner.

In national surveys, Republicans, Democrats and independents have expressed overwhelming support for getting rid of the EC. The conversation typically ends when people consider how difficult it would be to pass a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the EC. As I have recently discovered, however, no such Amendment is required and the EC can still exist under a system that adheres to the popular vote.

Article 2, Section 1, Claus 2 of the US Constitution gives states the power to decide how to apportion their EC votes. This clause contains the seeds for the EC’s demise – and it would be achieved through an interstate compact. Jigga what?

An interstate compact is essentially an arrangement made between two or more states to work together on a particular issue. The best example of this is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates most of the NYC metropolitan area’s airports and seaports, and important transportation infrastructure and real estate (like the World Trade Center site).

Starting in 2007, states began using their Constitutional rights to subvert the EC by ratifying what has come to be known as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). States that implement the NPVIC agree to give all of their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, regardless of the winner in their own state.

This means that as soon as the NPVIC has as many states as is required to achieve an EC majority (currently 270 votes), the rest of states do not matter. You do not need to convince every state sign on to the NPVIC – only enough to get a majority in the EC. The EC can continue to exist, but it would only function as a formality in the electoral process.

The NPVIC is already law in eight states and Washington D.C. – that’s 132 electoral votes, or 49% of the target of 270. The NPVIC would only come into full effect once this target is achieved – until then, the winner take all system will persist.

Considering that the NPVIC started only six years ago, it’s not unreasonable to think that eventually (much sooner than a Constitutional Amendment at least), enough states would sign on to support the winner of the national popular vote.

The states that have signed on to the NPVIC are overwhelmingly blue. But I don’t rule out the possibility of red state support in the future. The best bet for that would be if Romney wins the popular vote, but Obama wins the Electoral College. If the polls from the last few weeks are any indication, such an outcome is very likely.