This is the third in a series of articles for those who wish to understand some reasons (aside from the political ones one can read elsewhere) why and how the recent election turned out the way it did. To read the earlier posts, just scroll down this page.
This third article may be especially interesting to my readers of other nationalities and a nice refresher for those in the US.
Two Houses of Congress
The founders of the United States envisioned the former colonies as much more similar to nation states, rather than, for example, counties in England. That’s why they called them “states.”
The federal government provides things that don’t make sense for individual states to do. For example, establish a common currency, postal system, army and navy.
Individual states still retain authority over matters that would be handled by a national government in many other countries. They establish their own civil and criminal codes of law, which are valid unless they violate the national Constitution or laws.
Smaller colonies wanted each future state to have the same number of representatives in Congress. Of course, larger colonies wanted the representatives apportioned based on the populations of the respective states.
Thus, the founders established two houses of Congress. Each state has two senators. The states’ number of representatives in the House is based on population.
The Electoral College
For presidential elections, each state’s number of electoral votes is the sum of the two senators plus that state’s number of representatives.
Each state establishes districts, each of which produces one electoral vote. For example, if 500 people in a district vote for candidate Smith and 200 vote for candidate Jones, that district’s single electoral vote will be for Jones. That’s one reason, the electoral vote can differ from the nationwide popular vote.
Furthermore, each state chooses how their electoral votes are counted. In some states, the electoral votes are proportional. Let’s say such a state has 50 electoral votes, and so, has 50 districts. Let’s also say that 20 of their districts turned in a majority vote for Smith and 30 for Jones. That state casts 20 electoral votes for Smith and 30 for Jones.
Other states have a “winner-take-all” electoral vote system. If, in such a state, 20 districts turn in a majority vote for Smith and 30 for Jones, that state will cast all 50 of its electoral votes for Jones.
This is another reason one candidate can win a majority of the popular vote (the number of individuals nationwide who voted for each candidate) and yet lose the electoral vote. This occurred in 2016. Donald Trump won the electoral vote, yet Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a wide margin.
Drawing Districts
One of the greatest powers of an individual state is to draw up the boundaries of the state’s districts and to change them from time to time. The term “gerrymandering” was first used when, in 1812, the governor of Massachusetts drew up a district boundary with such a convoluted shape that some people thought it looked like a salamander.
Gerrymandering is still practiced today. Weirdly shaped boundaries might be drawn, for example, to confine those who might vote against the party now in control of the state to as few districts as possible.
In the recent election, Harris received 48.2% of the popular vote. Trump received 50.1%. This amounts to a total of 149,223,169 individual votes cast. However, the number of people aged 18 or over in the United States is over 258, 000, 000.
So Why Don’t More People Vote?
For a single parent, working two jobs, voting might be a hardship, or even impossible. Those in other countries are sometimes amazed that election day is not a public holiday in the US.
I believe, however, that most of the reasons for not voting boil down to folks underestimating the value of their votes.
- One might be busy and think, I’m only one person. My vote can’t determine the outcome of the election. But if everyone adopted that philosophy, nobody would vote.
- Another might think, A large majority in my state leans in the opposite direction from me. And it’s a winner-take-all state. My vote could not possibly change the result of this election.
- I read that, after Barack Obama was elected president, many African-Americans took heart and looked for their lives to change for the better. As president, he achieved a lot—most notably, an affordable national healthcare system, similar to one that had been proposed by President Nixon—even though the Republican leaders in the Senate and House ordered their constituencies to vote against anything the president favored. However, when the lives of African-Americans did not change as much, or as quickly, as they had hoped, some didn’t have the heart to vote the second time around. They just didn’t feel they could bear setting themselves up for another disappointment.
Why It Is Important to Vote – Even if you feel certain that your state’s electoral votes will go the other way
For one thing, it’s important to have an effect on the nationwide popular vote.
Consider this analogy: vote tallies are not reported until after the polls have closed. That’s because such an announcement could influence those who have not yet voted. The more people who vote for a given candidate, the more likely others, especially those who are not strongly committed, will vote for that candidate.
Similarly, even after the election is over, when people see that their preferred candidate did well, or even won, in the popular vote, they are encouraged to continue voting in the future.
If you want to receive notice of future articles in this series, please sign up for my News Service in the area provided in the lower right of the home page of this website.