Al Gore does't like the Electoral College. Or more precisely, he doesn't like the way most states award their electoral votes. And no, it doesn't have anything to do with what happened in the 2000 presidential race, when he won the popular vote but lost the election to George W. Bush.
See also:
- 3 Ways to Bypass the Electoral College
- Republican Party Platform on the Electoral College
- Electoral Votes By State
Gore told Current TV he feels that voters outside of about a dozen large, winner-take-all "battleground states" are cheated by the Electoral College system because the candidates ignore them every four years.
"I've seen how these states are written off and ignored, and people are effectively disenfranchised in the presidential race. And I really do now think it is time to change that," Gore said this month.
Why, he wonders, don't we elect presidents the way we choose members of Congress or governors - which is to say, by popular vote?
Gore did not say he wants to actually abolish or alter the Electoral College, which would take an act of Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution. There are other ways to change the way we elect presidents that do not involve fiddling with constitutional issues.
First, a brief explanation: All but two states, Nebraska and Maine, award electoral votes by a winner-take-all method based on the popular vote. In other words, even though Gore won slightly more than half of the popular vote in Pennsylvania in 2000, he still got all 21 of its electoral votes.
While the U.S. Constitution establishes the Electoral College, it does not require states to award their delegates in such a way. In fact, the Constitution leaves that matter up to the states. Nebraska and Maine, for example, award their electoral votes by the presidential results in each of their congressional districts.
The method of electoral-vote distribution Gore appears to support, however, is the one embraced by the National Popular Vote initiative. States that enter the compact agree to award their electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and Washington, D.C..
Eights states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation requiring their electoral votes be awarded to the winner of the national popular vote. The proposal can go into effect only if states accounting for 270 or more electoral votes agree to the system.
The states that have agreed hold 132 of the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the presidential race. They are: California, with 55 electoral votes; Illinois, with 20 electoral votes; New Jersey, with 14 electoral votes; Washington, with 12 electoral votes; Massachusetts, with 11 electoral votes; Maryland, with 10 electoral votes; Hawaii, with 4 electoral votes; Vermont, with 3 electoral votes; and Washington, D.C., with 3 electoral votes.
For what it's worth, the Republican Party opposes any attempt to alter, reform or abolish the Electoral College. Its 2012 platform, adopted at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., states:
"We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact or any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College. We recognize that an unconstitutional effort to impose 'national popular vote' would be a mortal threat to our federal system and a guarantee of corruption as every ballot box in every state would become a chance to steal the presidency."
[Photo: Former Vice President and 2000 Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore/Getty Images]
Follow U.S. Politics on Twitter | Follow U.S. Politics on Facebook
Comments
Oh, Oh, is he thinking of another run? The system didn’t work for him the last time out so….he wants to change it?
I dont understand all of this political talk, but I do agree that all states should have the same method of selection. it should be uniform across the board.
“We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact or any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College. We recognize that an unconstitutional effort to impose ‘national popular vote’ would be a mortal threat to our federal system and a guarantee of corruption as every ballot box in every state would become a chance to steal the presidency.”
This from the party that stole elections in 2000 and 2004. They’re doing their best to steal this one as well. The bitter irony is sad and distasteful.
I am definitely in favor of doing away with the electoral college and have been for a long time. I’m not sure exactly when this came about, but I think individual votes should count, not a group of people supposedly representing everyone. And NO, I’m not a democrat.
Although i am a staunch Republican, i agree with Mr. Gore in that an electoral college amendment is far overdue. Let’s allocate each state’s electoral votes based on the percentages of their popular vote totals with a change to the overall electoral vote required. This would give a true reflection of the people’s will. Also, let us all realize that the media is a business and should not be the determining factor in who wins the presidency or any other office.
I absolutely support the National Popular Vote Initiative. A candidate who wins the current electoral college vote but loses the popular vote will always have his bonafides in question, causing a perceived weakness in the authority of the President and a loss of voting power of the citizen.
i truly do not believe our current system reflects every individual vote fairly.Each state represents a different amt of people as well as culture.Giving larger states a clear advantage and takes away the importance of individual freedom of election.I too agree change is needed and that these politicians days of political biased should not be the issue,but their personal beliefs and plans an issue.Get rid of all parties and their objectives that are based on monies and lobbiest!!!