THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF SOUTHEASTERN CT

More on the National Popular Vote Movement

A Few Obstacles to Consider

By Rosanne Smyle

Special to The Times

          Were you one of those voters disgusted with the Electoral College system after the 2000 Presidential election debacle? Were you angry that, despite Al Gore having garnered hundreds of thousands of votes over George W. Bush, Gore ultimately lost the election? Did you find yourself asking, “What happened to the concept of one person, one vote? Is it time to get rid of the Electoral College system?”

          You might also have found yourself behind the National Popular Vote movement. Four states have voted for the NPV compact, and another 15, including Connecticut, have legislation in the works to try to pass the concept that elects the candidate with the highest number of votes nationally.

          Before scrapping a system that has been in place for more than 200 years, however, Political Scientist Dorothy B. James cautioned that the NVP has more than a few obstacles to overcome before becoming reality. 

          James, professor of government at Connecticut College, offered historical perspective and a dose of political reality in a recent talk sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Southeastern Connecticut at the Waterford Public Library.

          While some people felt passionate about the outcome of the 2000 election, James, whose specialization includes presidential politics, elections and Constitutional law, noted that the election marked one of only five times since 1789 that the electoral vote has not agreed with the popular vote.

          The first two, in 1800 and 1824, happened before the country established a strong political party system, she said. The third, in 1876, occurred in an election genuinely in doubt, James said, while the fourth, in 1888, happened in an election marred by fraud and corruption.

          The circumstances surrounding the 2000 election culminated in what some have called a political perfect storm, borrowing the term from the maritime tragedy detailed in the book “The Perfect Storm,” in which everything that could go wrong did go wrong, James said.

          “This is not something that’s the wave of the future,” she said. “And this is not going to be a frequent event.”

          The National Popular Vote Compact proposal offers a way to elect the president by popular vote and circumvent the U.S. Constitution, in which the Electoral College system is specified. It does, however, use the Electoral College, as it would take effect nationally only after identical legislation was passed by enough states to equal the required majority of 270 electoral votes.

          Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and Hawaii – representing 50 electoral votes – have passed legislation to enact the NVP.

          Going this route has its obstacles, but amending the Constitution would present even more difficult challenges. Changing the Constitution is a rare feat, James said, given the history of proposing and ratifying 27 amendments in more than 200 years, 10 comprising the Bill of Rights and three enacted during the Civil War, when half the country wasn’t included in the vote.

          Another issue for thought, James said, is if the NVP system is enacted, what would prevent another matter from circumventing the amendment route and being implemented, another matter that might not be as benign as electing a president.

          Under the NVP system, if the majority of the nation voted for the Republican candidate, while Connecticut voted for the Democrat, our state would have to go along with the majority.

          The Electoral College also gives rural states a chance to vote for their candidate, rather than be swallowed up in a larger geographical area with a different candidate choice under the NVP compact. The critical number of 270 electoral votes would be reached if the country’s 11 largest states adopted the NVP compact.

          James also noted that the United States is a nation with an overabundance of lawyers who would dissect the wording of any NPV proposal and ultimately tie up the issue in litigation. She reminded her audience of a former president’s question on language that depended on the definition of what “is” is.

          Also, she said, the NPV has no provision for recounts, which, given the current state of the contested Minnesota senate race, would seem necessary.

          Even more problematic, she said, is that we have 51 different electoral systems across the nation and a general sloppiness in vote counts. Keeping track of voters is an issue.

          “People are losing their homes. They are not living where they vote.”

          Absentee ballots failing to arrive on time, inaccurate voter registrations and flawed software are just a few of the basic problems sorely needing attention in an inadequately funded and staffed system.

          Then there is the problem of unannounced polling places. James noted that she, a political scientist, didn’t know until she went to vote that the location changed because of construction. She said she scrambled to call people and let them know.    

          Driving home her point, she cited a recent New York Times article on an academic study, in which it was reported that in 2008, four million to five million voters had problems with registration or absentee ballots and did not vote. The story also said another two million to four million voters were discouraged from voting after encountering problems such as long lines and identification requirements.       

          Also, while some are calling for more and more technology, James said, “Technology gets in the way of accuracy.”

          It’s one more step and one more chance, she said, for something to go wrong.

          “Voters do obscenely stupid things,” she said. What is needed in an election is accuracy, simplicity, verifiability, speed, transparency and anonymity for the voter.

          “Until you can take care of these technical issues, then you’re not going to get closer to one person one vote.”

          Rosanne Smyle is a member of the board of the League of Women Voters of Southeastern Connecticut. The League, open to men and women, is a non-partisan group that encourages informed and active participation in government.