Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
College Cramming: A refresher course on the Electoral College
College Cramming: A refresher course on the Electoral College
Jan 30, 2026 3:28 AM

Whether the Republicans cry “rigged” or the Democrats scream “disenfranchised” we can be certain of one thing: the President won’t be elected next Tuesday. Even if there are no hanging chads or last minute court appeals, the election of the President won’t officially be decided until January 6, 2017.

It may seem strange that the presidential results won’t be final until a few days before the inauguration. But that’s the way the Founding Father’s designed the system to work.

Confused? Then it’s probably time for a brief refresher on the Electoral College:

Where did the Electoral College e from?

Although the term Electoral College is never used in the Constitution (Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3), the electors that choose the President at each election are traditionally called a College (meaning a group of people organized toward mon goal). The Electoral College was proposed by James Wilson at the Constitutional Convention as promise between those who wanted the Congress to choose the President and those who believed the election should be decided by the state legislatures. The Framers were generally in agreement that giving the people the power to directly elect the President was a bad idea.

Who decides how many electoral votes each state receives?

Each state receives an electoral vote for each U.S. Senator (two per state) plus one for each Congressional representative. Since the number of representatives is based on population, the state’s electoral votes are also based on the number of people who reside within a state. Currently, the Electoral College includes 538 electors, 535 for the total number of congressional members, and three who represent Washington, D.C. (for the purposes ofthe Electoral College, the District of Columbia is treated like a state).

How do these electoral votes decide who es president?

On the Monday following the second Wednesday in December (which falls on the 19th this year), the electors of each state meet in their respective state capitals to cast the official votes for President and Vice President. These votes are then sealed and sent to the president of the Senate (the current Vice President, Joe Biden), who will open and read the votes on January 6th in the presence of both houses of Congress. The winner is sworn into office exactly two weeks later, at noon January 20.

Who are these electors?

Since the political parties choose electors, they tend to be partisan political activists. The Constitution doesn’t have any requirements other than specifications for who cannot be an elector: a Representative or Senator, a high-ranking U.S. official in a position of “trust or profit”, or anyone who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States.

Do the electors have to vote for the candidate who received the most votes in their state?

Nope. The elector is free to cast his vote for anyone he or she chooses. In fact, there have been times when electors have voted contrary to the will of the people—and it’s entirely Constitutional. Anyone who votes against their state’s choice is known as a “faithless elector” and essentially ruins any future they might have had with their political party.

How many electoral votes are need to win?

A Presidential candidate must receive a majority (270 of the 538 eligible) in order to win the election.

What happens if there is a tie?

What would happen if Trump and Clinton both get exactly 269 votes? Then the House of Representative gets to elect the President. They must choose from the from the three nominees who got the most Electoral votes (Trump, Hillary, and maybe Evan McMullin if he were to win Utah). Each state gets one vote so 26 states are needed to win. And yes, McMullin could win the electoral votes of only one state and the House could still choose him to be President. (This has happened twice in our nation’s history with the House choosing Thomas Jefferson over Aaron Burr and John Quincy Adams being selected over Andrew Jackson.)

The Senate then elects the Vice President from the two Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes (Mike Pence or Tim Kaine, but not McMullin’s running mate, Mindy Finn). Each Senator gets one vote.

If the House can’t decide on a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect (Kaine or Pence) serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved.

So in theory we could have President Trump and Vice President Kaine, President Clinton and Vice President Pence, or President McMulling andeither Vice President Kaine or Pence.

That’s crazy. Wouldn’t relying on the popular vote be a better system?

Not necessarily. The popular vote is subject to types of fraud that don’t apply to the Electoral College system (except perhaps in swing states). Political parties, for instance, have no incentive to “run up the vote” when their candidate is going to take their state anyway, so they are less likely to resort to direct fraud. On the other hand, the Electoral College makes it virtually impossible for a third-party candidate to ever be elected (this election is the closest any will likely ever get). So if you’re a Libertarian or a Green candidate you may have a reason to want to scrap the current system. On the other hand, if you like Evan McMullin, the Electoral College is your last best hope to see your candidate in the White House.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Bruce Walker: On Charleston and Climate Change
In The Morning Sun, a Central Michigan newspaper, frequent PowerBlog contributor Bruce Walker discusses the connection between the Charleston shootings and the recent papal encyclical: The Charleston shooting rampage is a terrible reminder that very real evil manifests itself in this world, presumably performed in the name of all that is malevolent. The sickness that devalues innocent human lives over something as arbitrary as pigmentation to the point the violent taking of those lives somehow makes sense can be only...
The Human Side of the Greek Crisis
“With the Greek welfare state on the skids, the Church has stepped up,” says Dylan Pahman in this week’s Acton Commentary. Many Orthodox parishes have ministries to help those hit by the economic crisis, still struggling six years later. With negotiations between Greece and its “troika” creditors dragging out like a soap opera with no ending, the economic indicators aren’t providing much cause for optimism. According to Standard & Poor, as of 2014 Greece’s GDP has shrunk to 75% what...
Religious Left Shareholder Activists Climb Aboard the Laudato Si Bandwagon
The release last week of Pope Francis’ Laudato Si unleashed a heaven-rending chorus of hallelujahs from the religious left. The activist shareholder investors in the choir loft, those affiliated with the Interfaith Center for Corporate Responsibility, were no exception. No sooner had the ink dried on the paper on which the encyclical’s printed than ICCR members hauled out the hyperbole. For example: Nora M Nash, OSF: Laudato Sii (Be Praised) will rise up and the cry of Mother Earth will...
Samuel Gregg: Pope Francis’ Overreach Plagues the Encyclical
Samuel Gregg, director of research at the Acton Institute, recently wrote for The Federalist that the overreach by the Pope into a wide range of environmental issues plagues the text of the encyclical: Neither the pope nor the teaching authority he exercises is required ment on every imaginable subject discussed in the public square, whether it is air-conditioning’s environmental impact, contemporary threats to plankton, the effect of synthetic agrotoxins on birds, or how dams affect animal migration (and, yes, all...
Kishore Jayabalan reacts to the eco-encyclical on EWTN
Kishore Jayabalan, director of Istituto Acton in Rome, appeared on EWTN News Nightly last week to talk about the environmental encyclical and the pope’s emphasis on personal virtue and Christian stewardship. On Thursday, mented that the poor will actually be hurt if people consume less, highlighting the need to connect sound economics to poverty alleviation plans: And on Friday, he discussed the pontiff’s emphasis on personal responsibility and virtue, which he said sets Francis apart from most environmentalists: ...
Doug Bandow: Laudato Si Misses the Problem of Politics
Doug Bandow, member of the Advisory Board of the Acton Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, discusses the problem of politics with regard to Pope Francis’ recent encyclical. In Calling on Government, Laudato Si Misses the Problem of Politics by Doug Bandow In his new encyclical, Laudato Si, Pope Francis challenges “every person living on this planet” to adopt a new “ecological spirituality.” But his economic and policy prescriptions are more controversial than his theological convictions. Indeed,...
Acton Audio & Video Roundup: Acton University and Laudato Si’
It’s been a busy week for the Acton Institute, with Pope Francis’Laudeto Si’arriving in the middle of our biggest conference event of the year, Acton University. As a result, there is a bounty of media for Acton supporters to enjoy this week. Here’s a review, in case you missed anything. Let’s start off with Acton University: All four evening keynote speeches are available for your viewing pleasure on our YouTube channel. I’ve embedded the addressdelivered last Wednesday by Gregory Thornbury,...
Supreme Court: Yes, Of Course the Fifth Amendment Applies to All Property
“The Fifth Amendment applies to personal property as well as real property,” wrote Justice Roberts in a Supreme Court rulinghanded down earlier this week. “The Government has a categorical duty to pay pensation when it takes your car, just as when it takes your home.” You might be thinking, “Was that ever in doubt?” The answer is apparently yes—at least it was by the federal government since the time of FDR’s New Deal. During theNew Deal era, Congress gave the...
The Pope’s Climate Confusion
In The American Spectator today, Ross Kaminsky critiques the economics behind Laudato Si’ and suggests that the pontiff’s ideas may do more harm than good. Let’s be clear: The pope is no fan of capitalism, of the rich countries of the northern hemisphere, or of economic rationality. His desire to help the poor of the world is undoubtedly sincere but his policy inclinations are so poorly informed — both in terms of science and economics — that if implemented they...
Fr. Michael Butler: An Orthodox Christian Perspective on Laudato Si
Fr. Michael Butler offers insight on the recent encyclical from an Orthodox Christian perspective at Acton University 2015: ...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved