New legislation proposed in the Rhode Island General Assembly could eliminate the power of the Electoral College in the Ocean State.
The legislation is part of an interstate compact, the National Popular Vote Plan, through which states promise to give their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the majority of the nationwide popular vote.
The compact would go into effect when states with a majority of the electoral votes in the college pass appropriate legislation enacting the compact. The bill currently has 233 sponsors in 47 states, according to the Web site of National Popular Vote Inc., the nonprofit group backing the national movement. Legislation has already passed in the Colorado Senate and the Hawaii Senate.
Rhode Island has four electoral votes. A presidential candidate must have 270 votes in the college to be elected.
"The best reason to pass the bill is to put Rhode Island back on the map for the general election," said Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Dist. 18, who is co-sponsoring the bill with Rep. David Segal, D-Dist. 2, in the House of Representatives.
"In this day and age, it's easy to target ads and efforts to the big states where there are (a) lot more electoral votes in play," Handy said. "This way, our state will have more opportunities to hear from candidates during election time."
"Rhode Island does not get its share of the primary dollars, campaign dollars - this translates later into grants and federal aid dollars," said Sen. Daniel Issa, D-Dist. 16, the measure's sponsor in the Senate.
Additionally, Issa said, members of the Electoral College from Rhode Island are not currently required to vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in the state, allowing them to theoretically vote for another candidate. That "quirk in the law" should be changed, he said.
Issa cited the 2000 race between Al Gore and George W. Bush as an example of flaws in the current Electoral College system. Though Gore won the national popular vote, Bush won a majority in the Electoral College and the presidency.
"I think the Electoral College is really antiquated," Handy said, adding that the bill is "a logical, smart step" toward changing the current system of electing the president.
Issa said the bill's introduction is timely. "It's an appropriate time in light of the upcoming presidential primaries - a good time to review without an election immediately at hand," he said.
Associate Professor of Political Science Wendy Schiller said she is less enthusiastic about the legislation. "If you want to eliminate all of your clout as an individual state, that is the way to do it," she said.
Schiller said if states give their electoral votes to the winners of the national popular vote, it dilutes the influence of states with smaller populations. "That is not necessarily what a country as geographically diverse as ours should want," she said. The recent visits of presidential hopefuls Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., to Rhode Island indicate that they will return again to woo Rhode Island voters, she said.
Darrell West, professor of political science and director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy, said the legislation may have difficulty becoming law.
"Generally we don't have major changes in the electoral process unless there is a constitutional crisis," West said. "I am not sure that this approach would withstand legal scrutiny. They are essentially trying to amend the constitution without going through the amendment process."
But supporters of the bill cite its avoidance of the amendment process as a draw. "Constitutional amendments are so difficult to pass. I mean, look at the Equal Rights Amendment - years and years of work never came to fruition," Handy said. "(The National Popular Vote Plan) leaves it up to individual states to make their choices."
Issa said though a constitutional amendment "would be the better way to do it ... it's a very laborious, difficult process. The bill is a logical, simpler way to achieve the end - one man, one vote."
Tor Tarantola '08, president of the Brown Democrats, said he thinks the National Popular Vote Plan is a good idea. "The electoral college system is an anachronism from the days when the president was considered an officer of the federation of sovereign states rather than a representative of the people," he said.
"The actions and politics of the president have a direct impact on people's lives and everyone's vote should therefore be counted equally. A vote in Montana shouldn't count more than a vote in California," Tarantola said.
David McNamee '07 said he thinks it is absurd that presidential campaigns focus on battleground states like Ohio and Florida instead of major urban centers such as New York or Los Angeles. "Although the outcome runs counter to what the founders of the Constitution envisioned as the ideal electoral procedure, there is merit in the fact that these states are undergoing this process in a way that is compatible with the system that the founders valued so much," McNamee said.
Although undermining the Electoral College might run counter to the original vision of the framers, McNamee said the usage of states' rights in this process is in the spirit of the system of government the founders valued.
"There is something about democracy that requires its participants to think beyond their own, immediate self-interest. I think that is what Rhode Island is doing and other states that consider the bill are going to do," McNamee said.
