An invisible problem with the Electoral College – it shows bad guys where to focus their efforts

Over the past 4 years, Congress and state governments have worked hard to forestall the aftermath of the 2024 election from spiraling into the identical chaos and threats to democracy that surrounded the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

A brand new federal law eliminates ambiguities that could lead on to election manipulation. New state laws Measures have been enacted across the country to guard poll staff from threats and harassment, and technology experts are working to combat disinformation campaigns and vulnerabilities in voting systems.

But all these improvements don’t affect the essential structure of the presidential elections – the Electoral College.

Here is a fast refresher on how the system works today:

After residents vote within the presidential elections in November, the structure will gives the electors the duty of electing the president and vp. Electors are allocated based on the variety of congressmen and senators from each state. The electors meet of their respective state capitals in December to solid their votes. The ballots are then counted by the vp in front of the congressmen on January 6 to find out which ticket won the bulk.

The diverse Advantages and downsides of the electoral college have been discussed and presented at length. But there’s one other problem that few have recognized: the Electoral College makes American democracy more vulnerable to individuals with malicious intent.

A state-centered system

The Electoral College's original brilliance has turn into certainly one of its best weaknesses. The unusual system was conceived on the 1787 Constitutional Convention as a compromise that emphasized representation of the states' interests. That emphasis helped win over reluctant delegates who feared that essentially the most populous states would ignore the concerns of small states.

Today, almost every state awards all of its electoral votes to the candidate who receives essentially the most votes within the state. Even if a candidate receives 51% of the vote, the appliance of the winner-take-all rule in these states signifies that she or he is awarded 100% of the electoral votes.

This results in the phenomenon of “swing states”: presidential candidates focus their rallies, promoting and public relations on the few states where campaigns could actually make the difference. In 2020, 77% of all Campaign ads were only shown in six states during which only 21% of the country’s population lived.

In this manner, the Electoral College system focuses the campaign's attention on issues that would make the difference in these hotbeds of competition.

A guide to bad behavior

In this manner, the system essentially identifies the states where malicious individuals in search of to govern or undermine the election consequence should focus their energy. The few swing states are efficient targets for malicious efforts that will otherwise not have much success with election tampering.

Someone in search of to subvert the electoral system could have a tough time causing problems in a national popular vote, since it is determined by hundreds of separate local jurisdictions. In the Electoral College, against this, it is simple to cause mischief by interfering in only a couple of states which can be widely considered to be crucial.

In 2020, the lawsuits, hacking, alternate electors, recounts and other challenges didn’t goal states that some viewed as less secure because that they had less stringent voter ID laws or less stringent voter signature requirements. Nor did opponents of the outcomes goal states like California and Texas, which make up a big share of the nation's electorate.

Rather, all of the firepower was focused on about half a dozen swing states. According to 1 account, there have been 82 lawsuits filed in the times following the 2020 presidential electionof which 77 targeted six swing states. “Fake Elector” programs Only in seven swing states did disputes arise during which supporters of Donald Trump presented unofficial electoral lists.

The alternative of a referendum

A majority of Americans say in surveys They prefer to abolish the Electoral College system and easily give the presidency to the one that receives essentially the most votes nationwide.

Abolishing the Electoral College would have quite a few consequences, nevertheless it would immediately eliminate the power to govern elections through swing states. An in depth election in Arizona or Pennsylvania would now not have the ability to overturn the national consequence.

Any electoral system that doesn’t depend on states because the pieces of the voting puzzle would eliminate such possibilities. It could also greatly reduce disputes over recounts and suspicions about late-night vote counts, long lines, and faulty voting machines, as these local concerns could be overshadowed by the statewide vote totals.

Although not without their very own worriesan agreement between the States, award their electoral votes to the winner of the favored vote might be essentially the most practical approach to moving to a referendum, amongst other things since it doesn’t Adoption of an amendment to the Constitution.

There isn’t any ideal method to conduct a presidential election. The Electoral College has survived in its current form for nearly two centuries – a remarkable achievement for democracy. But in an era when intense control by a couple of states is the norm, the system also provides opportunities for individuals who need to harm democracy.