{"id":274101,"date":"2020-11-04T23:32:53","date_gmt":"2020-11-05T04:32:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=274101"},"modified":"2020-11-04T23:32:53","modified_gmt":"2020-11-05T04:32:53","slug":"who-invented-the-electoral-college","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2020\/11\/04\/who-invented-the-electoral-college\/","title":{"rendered":"Who invented the Electoral College?"},"content":{"rendered":"
A transcript from the Constitutional Convention records the official report creating the Electoral College.
\nU.S. National Archives<\/a>, CC BY-NC-ND<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The delegates in Philadelphia agreed, in the summer of 1787, that the new country they were creating would not have a king but rather an elected executive. But they did not agree on how to choose that president.<\/p>\n

Pennsylvania delegate James Wilson called the problem of picking a president \u201cin truth, one of the most difficult of all we have to decide<\/a>.\u201d Other delegates, when they later recounted the group\u2019s effort, said \u201cthis very subject embarrassed them more than any other \u2013 that various systems were proposed, discussed, and rejected<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

They were at risk of concluding their meetings without finding a way to pick a leader. In fact, this was the very last thing written into the final draft. Had no agreement been reached, the delegates would not have approved the Constitution.<\/p>\n

I am a civics educator<\/a> who has also run Purdue University\u2019s Constitution Day celebration for 15 years, and one lesson I always return to is the degree to which the founders had to compromise in order to ensure ratification. Selecting the president was one of those compromises.<\/p>\n

Three approaches were debated during the Constitutional Convention: election by Congress, selection by state legislatures and a popular election \u2013 though the right to vote was generally restricted to white, landowning men.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Delegates to the Constitutional Convention had to invent an entire new form of government.<\/span>
\nHoward Chandler Christy\/Architect of the Capitol<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Should Congress pick the president?<\/h2>\n

Some delegates at the Constitutional Convention thought that letting Congress pick the president would provide a buffer from what Thomas Jefferson referred to as the \u201cwell-meaning, but uninformed people<\/a>\u201d who, in a nation the size of the United States, \u201ccould have no knowledge of eminent characters<\/a> and qualifications and the actual selection decision.\u201d<\/p>\n

Others were concerned that this approach threatened the separation of powers created in the first three articles of the Constitution: Congress might choose a weak executive to prevent the president from wielding veto power, reducing the effectiveness of one of the system\u2019s checks and balances. In addition, the president might feel indebted to Congress and yield some power back to the legislative branch.<\/p>\n

Virginia delegate James Madison was concerned that giving Congress the power to select the president \u201cwould render it the executor as well as the maker of laws<\/a>; and then \u2026 tyrannical laws may be made that they may be executed in a tyrannical manner.\u201d<\/p>\n

That view persuaded his fellow Virginian George Mason to reverse his previous support for congressional election of the president and to then conclude that he saw \u201cmaking the Executive the mere creature of the Legislature<\/a> as a violation of the fundamental principle of good Government.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>
These 11 men agreed on a compromise that created the Electoral College.<\/span>
\nThe Conversation, from Wikimedia Commons<\/span>, CC BY-ND<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Letting state lawmakers choose<\/h2>\n

Some delegates thought getting states directly involved in picking the leader of the national government was a good approach for the new federal system.<\/p>\n

But others, including Alexander Hamilton, worried that states would select a weak executive, to increase their own power. Hamilton also observed that legislators are often slower to move than top leaders might be expected to: \u201cIn the legislature, promptitude of decision is oftener an evil than a benefit<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not as pithy as the musical, perhaps, but the point is clear: Don\u2019t trust the state legislatures.<\/p>\n

Power to the people?<\/h2>\n

The final approach debated was that of popular election. Some delegates, like New York delegate Gouverneur Morris, viewed the president as the \u201cguardian of the people<\/a>,\u201d whom the public should elect directly.<\/p>\n

The Southern states objected, arguing that they would be disadvantaged in a popular election in proportion to their actual populations<\/a> because of the large numbers of enslaved people in those states who could not vote. This was eventually resolved \u2013 in one of those many compromises \u2013 by counting each enslaved person as three-fifths of a free person<\/a> for the purposes of representation.<\/p>\n

George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, shared Jefferson\u2019s skepticism about regular Americans, saying it would be \u201cunnatural to refer the choice of a proper character<\/a> for chief Magistrate to the people, as it would, to refer a trial of colours to a blind man. The extent of the Country renders it impossible that the people can have the requisite capacity to judge of the respective pretensions of the Candidates.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>
The Journal of the Federal Convention records the formal proposal to create the Electoral College.<\/span>
\nU.S. National Archives<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"The
The Journal of the Federal Convention records the formal proposal to create the Electoral College.<\/span>
\nU.S. National Archives<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

11 left to make the decision<\/h2>\n

The delegates appointed a committee of 11 members \u2013 one from each state at the Constitutional Convention \u2013 to solve this and other knotty problems, which they called the \u201cGrand Committee on Postponed Questions,\u201d and charged with resolving \u201cunfinished business, including how to elect the President<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

At the beginning, six of the 11 members preferred national popular elections. But they realized they could not get the Constitution ratified with that provision: The Southern states simply would not agree to it.<\/p>\n

Between Aug. 31 and Sept. 4, 1787, the committee wrestled with producing an acceptable compromise. The committee\u2019s third report to the Convention proposed the adoption of a system of electors<\/a>, through which both the people and the states would help choose the president. It\u2019s not clear which delegate came up with the idea, which was a partly national and partly federal solution, and which mirrored other structures in the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Popularity and protection<\/h2>\n

Hamilton and the other founders were reassured that with this compromise system, neither public ignorance nor outside influence would affect the choice of a nation\u2019s leader. They believed that the electors would ensure that only a qualified person became president<\/a>. And they thought the Electoral College would serve as a check on a public who might be easily misled, especially by foreign governments<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[Deep knowledge, daily.<\/em> Sign up for The Conversation\u2019s newsletter<\/a>.]<\/p>\n

But the original system \u2013 in which the winner of the Electoral College would become president and the runner-up became vice president \u2013 fell apart almost immediately. By the election of 1800, political parties had arisen<\/a>. Because electoral votes for president and vice president were not listed on separate ballots, Democratic-Republican running mates Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr tied<\/a> in the Electoral College, sending the contest to the House of Representatives. The House ultimately chose Jefferson as the third president, leaving Burr as vice president \u2013 not John Adams, who had led the opposing Federalist party ticket.<\/p>\n

The problem was resolved in 1804 when the 12th Amendment<\/a> was ratified, allowing the electors to cast separate ballots for president and vice president. It has been that way ever since.\"The<\/p>\n

Phillip J VanFossen<\/a>, J.F. Ackerman Professor of Social Studies Education; Director, Ackerman Center; Associate Director, Purdue Center for Economic Education, Purdue University<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

This article is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A transcript from the Constitutional Convention records the official report creating the Electoral College. U.S. National Archives, CC BY-NC-ND The …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":274104,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-274101","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-lifestyle","mauthors-phillip-j-vanfossen-purdue-university","mauthors-the-conversation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/274101","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=274101"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/274101\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":274105,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/274101\/revisions\/274105"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/274104"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=274101"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=274101"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=274101"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}