Shaping the Electoral College Part XIII

ArticleVBlog ^ | September 16th 2019 | Rodney Dodsworth

[Jacquerie]

Subtitle: September 5th. George Mason prefers the government of Prussia.

As we know, the Convention adjourned on September 17th and forwarded the draft Constitution to Congress. At this late stage, delegates were rapidly filling-in the Constitution’s various powers and limits. It’s all the more amazing they still squirmed over how to elect a President. Tempers flared.

In their quest to craft a suitable presidential election mode, the delegates failed once again; they ended the day where they began:

The executive power of the U. S. shall be vested in a single person. His stile shall be "The President of the U. S. of America" and his title shall be "His Excellency." He shall be elected by ballot by the Legislature. He shall hold his office during the term of seven years; but shall not be elected a second time.

Debate returned to the report from the Committee of Eleven, composed of one delegate from each state. The committee recommended unlimited four-year presidential terms, a Vice President to preside over the Senate, and an electoral college with state-derived electors allocated by Congressional representation. In the event of no majority winner in the electoral college, the Senate would immediately vote to appoint the president from among the top five nominees.

[snip]

Given the closeness between the Senate and a president, together they could subvert the Constitution. To avoid this, he motioned to strike "if such number be a majority of that of the electors” from the clause.

Instead he proposed, “The Person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President.” To keep presidential elections entirely out of the Senate and Congress, Mason proposed a plurality winner! We can only guess today at the ramifications of a plurality president.

[MuttTheHoople]

I would like to see the Nebraska/Maine option- assign an electoral vote for each district, then give the 2 Senate electoral votes to whoever wins the State. This puts the whole nation into play, not just a few battleground States.

[Jacquerie]

Agree. It might quiet down the NPV.

[PGalt]

Education/history BUMP!

[Svartalfiar]

I would like to see the Nebraska/Maine option- assign an electoral vote for each district, then give the 2 Senate electoral votes to whoever wins the State. This puts the whole nation into play, not just a few battleground States.

I would like to see this too, but it's very difficult to carry out. Why would a deep red state like NY or Mass or CA give up electors they know would otherwise be Dem? Likewise, Texas and other blue states aren't stupid enough to change from all-blue to 5-10 of the border districts going for a Dem.

This kind of change would need to be an all-in, all-at-once kind of change.