ELECTORAL COLLEGE OVERWHELMINGLY FAVORS REPUBLICANS, ABOLISHING ENTIRE SYSTEM ONLY REMEDY: STUDY

Source: https://www.newsweek.com/abolish-electoral-college-favors-republicans-over-democrats-future-presidential-elections-study-1464834
Published: Oct 13, 2019
Author: Benjamin Fearnow
Post Date: 2019-10-13 11:27:10 by A K A Stone
Views: 1838

The Republican Party is set to win a large majority of all future close presidential elections, even contests in which they lose the popular vote, according to a recent study.

GOP candidates for president can expect to be victorious in 65 percent of future presidential elections and University of Texas at Austin researchers analyzed why "inversions" — where the popular vote winner loses the overall election — has happened twice since 2000.

The study authors found that the Electoral College's winner-take-all approach favors Republicans and has pushed them to victories in 2000 and 2016.

The researchers concluded that inversions will occur more and more in 2020 and beyond unless a policy change completely dissolves, rather than reforms, the Electoral College.

The study released by the National Bureau of Economic Research last month...

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Hank Rearden    To: A K A Stone (#0)

The researchers concluded that inversions will occur more and more in 2020 and beyond unless a policy change completely dissolves, rather than reforms, the Electoral College.

So they're unaware it'd take a Constitutional amendment?

Hank Rearden posted on 2019-10-13 12:14:38   Reply   Private Reply

#2: misterwhite    To: A K A Stone (#0)

Here's the real problem. The number of electoral votes is equal to the total number of Senators and House members each State has.

The number of Senators per state is fixed at two, and the number of representatives (per Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution) was set at one for every 30,000 persons.

We are a nation of 300 million citizens. Per the U.S. Constitution, we should have 10,000 Representatives! We don't. The Apportionment Act of 1911 fixed the the number of members of the United States House of Representatives at 435.

Which means the high population states are grossly underrepresented in the Electoral College.

misterwhite posted on 2019-10-13 18:07:42   Reply   Private Reply

#3: A K A Stone    To: misterwhite (#2)

Here's the real problem

There is no problem if leftists lose.

A K A Stone posted on 2019-10-13 20:43:44   Reply   Private Reply

#4: Vicomte13    To: A K A Stone (#0)

Republicans would not "win every election" if the opposition party actually had an ideology that appeals to the broad majority of Americans. They don't. They appeal to the urban masses and few others. So they lose, as they should.

Vicomte13 posted on 2019-10-14 08:34:39   Reply   Private Reply

#5: nolu chan    To: misterwhite (#2)

Here's the real problem. The number of electoral votes is equal to the total number of Senators and House members each State has.

The number of Senators per state is fixed at two, and the number of representatives (per Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution) was set at one for every 30,000 persons.

We are a nation of 300 million citizens. Per the U.S. Constitution, we should have 10,000 Representatives! We don't. The Apportionment Act of 1911 fixed the the number of members of the United States House of Representatives at 435.

Which means the high population states are grossly underrepresented in the Electoral College.

[NOTE] What the Constitution at Article 1, Sec 2, Cl 3 really says:

"The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative...."

Having 435 voting members does not exceed 1 for every 30,000 persons.

The census is a head count of individuals, not citizens. For apportionment of Representatives in the House, an illegal alien counts the same as a citizen.

nolu chan posted on 2019-10-18 21:37:03   Reply   Private Reply

#6: misterwhite    To: nolu chan (#5)

Having 435 voting members does not exceed 1 for every 30,000 persons.

True, but I never said the Apportionment Act of 1911 was unconstitutional. Just that the high population states are underrepresented in the House.

If the House had one representative for every 30,000 persons, the Electoral College vote would track the popular vote more closely. This would eliminate the "he won the Electoral vote but lost the popular vote" argument.

misterwhite posted on 2019-10-19 10:20:19   Reply   Private Reply