What do you think?
Rate this book
Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College
“Wegman combines in-depth historical analysis and insight into contemporary politics to present a cogent argument that the Electoral College violates America’s ‘core democratic principles’ and should be done away with…" —Publishers WeeklyThe framers of the Constitution battled over it. Lawmakers have tried to amend or abolish it more than 700 times. To this day, millions of voters, and even members of Congress, misunderstand how it works. It deepens our national divide and distorts the core democratic principles of political equality and majority rule. How can we tolerate the Electoral College when every vote does not count the same, and the candidate who gets the most votes can lose?Twice in the last five elections, the Electoral College has overridden the popular vote, calling the integrity of the entire system into question—and creating a false picture of a country divided into bright red and blue blocks when in fact we are purple from coast to coast. Even when the popular-vote winner becomes president, tens of millions of Americans—Republicans and Democrats alike—find that their votes didn't matter. And, with statewide winner-take-all rules, only a handful of battleground states ultimately decide who will become president.Now, as political passions reach a boiling point at the dawn of the 2020 race, the message from the American people is The way we vote for the only official whose job it is to represent all Americans is neither fair nor just. Major reform is needed—now. Isn't it time to let the people pick the president?In this thoroughly researched and engaging call to arms, Supreme Court journalist and New York Times editorial board member Jesse Wegman draws upon the history of the founding era, as well as information gleaned from campaign managers, field directors, and other officials from twenty-first-century Democratic and Republican presidential campaigns, to make a powerful case for abolishing the antiquated and antidemocratic Electoral College. In Let the People Pick the President he shows how we can at long last make every vote in the United States count—and restore belief in our democratic system.
272 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 17, 2020
240 people are currently reading
4735 people want to read
About the author
Jesse Wegman
2 books37 followersJESSE WEGMAN has been a member of the New York Times editorial board since 2013, writing editorials on the Supreme Court and legal affairs. He was previously a senior editor at the Daily Beast and Newsweek, a legal news editor at Reuters, and the managing editor of the New York Observer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 233 reviews
September 24, 2020
I have decided to embark on a mission to read a number of books on subjects that will be of great importance to the upcoming 2020 US Presidential Election. Many of these will focus on actors intricately involved in the process, in hopes that I can understand them better and, perhaps, educate others with the power to cast a ballot. I am, as always, open to serious recommendations from anyone who has a book I might like to include in the process.
This is Book #8 (a re-read) in my 2020 US Election Preparation Challenge.
First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Jesse Wegman, and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.
The current selection process for the election of the American president is undemocratic, argues Jesse Wegman in his book. While the Founding Fathers devised the Electoral College to keep the general public from skewing the results with their uneducated choices, they did so at a time that differs greatly from today. This arcane means of election is, as Wegman argues, unknown or misunderstood by many Americans even today. In the early part of his tome, Wegman explores the situation in colonial America that led the Founders to create this buffer system for election of their leader, as well as the arguments at the time. The Founders were not unanimous, though the strongest proponent of direct and popular election of the president—James Wilson—has fallen out of the history books for reasons Wegman presents in Chapter 1. Use of this Electoral College—which allocates all of the state’s electors (totalling the number of their representatives and senators sent to Congress) for the candidate who wins the most votes on Election Day—tended to create situations where certain factions or regionally populous areas could be powerhouses in choosing the winner. Even still, as Wegman argues, the discrepancies between a large state (California) and small one (Wyoming) actually benefits the smaller one in voting power, should one look at the population representation. Throughout history, this Electoral College has created some noticeable issues when it came to choosing the president (1800 being the first and largest soap opera for 200 years). Additionally, there were times (five in total) where the Electoral College winner did not capture the popular vote, meaning fewer people voted for the winner. In layman analysis, Wegman seeks to argue that the Electoral College promoted racial divide and national division, with the power-holders refusing the give up the advantage to level the playing field. However, much as many of the modern versions of racism and xenophobia in American politics, it is shrouded in loosely cobbled together arguments that make it smell more like a rose than the pile of dung it truly tends to be. Wegman explores some of the momentum to abolish the Electoral College, including a constitutional amendment that was begun in the late 1960s, but failed to pass muster in the strong US Senate. More recently, there has been a movement to shift talk to using the popular vote and yet still staying within the constitutional framework in which the Electoral College resides. Making ‘every vote equal’ seems to make sense on some level, but the arcane machinery in use is wrapped in that constitutional bow that many feel is too sacred to touch. After most presidential elections, the Electoral College gets an op-ed or two before disappearing for four years, only to rear its ugly head while many Americans (and people around the world) are baffled with how it all works. Wegman’s arguments are worth exploring and I would recommend anyone with an interest in the political machine of elections seek to read this, preferably before November 2020.
Many would say this book was penned as sour grapes after the 2016 election, or even those who are still smarting from 2000. However, even the current POTUS espoused the undemocratic nature of the Electoral College over popular vote in his Tweets from on High, until he realised the College (and the Russians) helped him defeat the system. Wegman argues throughout the book that the College failed masterfully in 2016, by allowing the candidate the system was designed to block to rise to victory. A filtered choice should have kept mob rule from choosing unqualified people to serve, and yet this is what happened. By unqualified, Wegman (and I... even the Founding Fathers) argues that it is someone who rides the waves of the politically detached elector, rather than he/she who is connected to the machinery and understands governing. The chapters in this tome are laid out clearly and allow for a layperson’s understanding, mixing history with modern discussions without going down an overly academic rabbit hole. It seeks not only to offer issues and blatant criticisms, but provides solutions to both sides of the argument. Wegman pulls no punches in arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College, feeling that the people should have the right to choose their president directly. Much like some of the Founding Fathers’ original ideas (male-only suffrage, slavery), the Electoral College was something that worked in late 18th century, but has outlived its usefulness. At a time when most of the Western World prefers the people to speak in as democratic a way as possible, one can hope that America will follow (or lead with a powerful statement) and dismantle or rejig the Electoral College to reflect the popular sentiment. Perhaps then it would truly be collegial!
Kudos, Mr. Wegman, for opening my eyes to this topic, which has long been of interest to me. As I sit inside a parliamentary democracy which has its own popular vote issues, I am always open to discussions of electoral reform!
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
This is Book #8 (a re-read) in my 2020 US Election Preparation Challenge.
First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Jesse Wegman, and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.
The current selection process for the election of the American president is undemocratic, argues Jesse Wegman in his book. While the Founding Fathers devised the Electoral College to keep the general public from skewing the results with their uneducated choices, they did so at a time that differs greatly from today. This arcane means of election is, as Wegman argues, unknown or misunderstood by many Americans even today. In the early part of his tome, Wegman explores the situation in colonial America that led the Founders to create this buffer system for election of their leader, as well as the arguments at the time. The Founders were not unanimous, though the strongest proponent of direct and popular election of the president—James Wilson—has fallen out of the history books for reasons Wegman presents in Chapter 1. Use of this Electoral College—which allocates all of the state’s electors (totalling the number of their representatives and senators sent to Congress) for the candidate who wins the most votes on Election Day—tended to create situations where certain factions or regionally populous areas could be powerhouses in choosing the winner. Even still, as Wegman argues, the discrepancies between a large state (California) and small one (Wyoming) actually benefits the smaller one in voting power, should one look at the population representation. Throughout history, this Electoral College has created some noticeable issues when it came to choosing the president (1800 being the first and largest soap opera for 200 years). Additionally, there were times (five in total) where the Electoral College winner did not capture the popular vote, meaning fewer people voted for the winner. In layman analysis, Wegman seeks to argue that the Electoral College promoted racial divide and national division, with the power-holders refusing the give up the advantage to level the playing field. However, much as many of the modern versions of racism and xenophobia in American politics, it is shrouded in loosely cobbled together arguments that make it smell more like a rose than the pile of dung it truly tends to be. Wegman explores some of the momentum to abolish the Electoral College, including a constitutional amendment that was begun in the late 1960s, but failed to pass muster in the strong US Senate. More recently, there has been a movement to shift talk to using the popular vote and yet still staying within the constitutional framework in which the Electoral College resides. Making ‘every vote equal’ seems to make sense on some level, but the arcane machinery in use is wrapped in that constitutional bow that many feel is too sacred to touch. After most presidential elections, the Electoral College gets an op-ed or two before disappearing for four years, only to rear its ugly head while many Americans (and people around the world) are baffled with how it all works. Wegman’s arguments are worth exploring and I would recommend anyone with an interest in the political machine of elections seek to read this, preferably before November 2020.
Many would say this book was penned as sour grapes after the 2016 election, or even those who are still smarting from 2000. However, even the current POTUS espoused the undemocratic nature of the Electoral College over popular vote in his Tweets from on High, until he realised the College (and the Russians) helped him defeat the system. Wegman argues throughout the book that the College failed masterfully in 2016, by allowing the candidate the system was designed to block to rise to victory. A filtered choice should have kept mob rule from choosing unqualified people to serve, and yet this is what happened. By unqualified, Wegman (and I... even the Founding Fathers) argues that it is someone who rides the waves of the politically detached elector, rather than he/she who is connected to the machinery and understands governing. The chapters in this tome are laid out clearly and allow for a layperson’s understanding, mixing history with modern discussions without going down an overly academic rabbit hole. It seeks not only to offer issues and blatant criticisms, but provides solutions to both sides of the argument. Wegman pulls no punches in arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College, feeling that the people should have the right to choose their president directly. Much like some of the Founding Fathers’ original ideas (male-only suffrage, slavery), the Electoral College was something that worked in late 18th century, but has outlived its usefulness. At a time when most of the Western World prefers the people to speak in as democratic a way as possible, one can hope that America will follow (or lead with a powerful statement) and dismantle or rejig the Electoral College to reflect the popular sentiment. Perhaps then it would truly be collegial!
Kudos, Mr. Wegman, for opening my eyes to this topic, which has long been of interest to me. As I sit inside a parliamentary democracy which has its own popular vote issues, I am always open to discussions of electoral reform!
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
March 14, 2020
This review is also published here: https://medium.com/ballasts-for-the-m...
Jesse Wegman has written a strong and convincing book about why the Electoral College should be abolished and why the president should be elected by the popular vote. Wegman gives a detailed history about the creation of the Electoral College and the context for its creation. The College was the last agenda item on the Constitutional Convention’s agenda. Most of the Framers were ready to go home and the College became a “Frankenstein Compromise” between the Framers who wanted Congress to pick the president and the ones who wanted a direct popular vote. The author introduces readers to one Framer who becomes the spiritual godfather of the popular vote movement, James Wilson. I for one was not familiar with him, he has an interesting backstory.
Readers will also learn about the last major effort that almost ended the Electoral College which occurred in 1969/1970 and was led by Senator Birch Bayh.
The most effective parts of Wegman’s book is when he turns common talking points or myths about the Electoral College on their heads. For example, the idea that one party prefers the president to be chosen by the Electoral College while the other wants it abolished is not true. Both parties have been in support of keeping the institution at different times. Whichever political party feels that they benefit the most from the Electoral College tends to be its biggest defender.
He also covers the National Popular Vote Compact, an Electoral College workaround, where states who represent at least a majority of the electoral votes pledge to send electors who will vote for the national popular vote winner even if that winner did not win the popular vote in their state. Wegman does a great job covering the merits and the deficiencies of the compact and provides a thorough overview of the support it has slowly received over time. It will be an interesting test to see what happens if the requisite number of states sign to the compact and if there's any political fallout from it.
Wegman’s chapter dispelling the myths of the popular vote was also particularly strong. He shows, contrary to popular belief, that voters in big cities would not swamp voters in small towns because there are less big city voters compared to everyone else.
The strongest argument for moving to a national popular vote, whether that be through the compact or constitutional amendment, is that more voters would participate since they would actually count unlike in the Electoral College winner take all system where if you are a Democrat in Mississippi or a Republican in Massachusetts your votes essentially don’t matter.
Wegman’s book is a great historical treatment of the Electoral College and makes a strong case why the popular vote is a better option. It should be read by everyone who thinks they have an opinion of the Electoral College.
Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and Jesse Wegman for the free ARC copy in exchange for a honest review.
Jesse Wegman has written a strong and convincing book about why the Electoral College should be abolished and why the president should be elected by the popular vote. Wegman gives a detailed history about the creation of the Electoral College and the context for its creation. The College was the last agenda item on the Constitutional Convention’s agenda. Most of the Framers were ready to go home and the College became a “Frankenstein Compromise” between the Framers who wanted Congress to pick the president and the ones who wanted a direct popular vote. The author introduces readers to one Framer who becomes the spiritual godfather of the popular vote movement, James Wilson. I for one was not familiar with him, he has an interesting backstory.
Readers will also learn about the last major effort that almost ended the Electoral College which occurred in 1969/1970 and was led by Senator Birch Bayh.
The most effective parts of Wegman’s book is when he turns common talking points or myths about the Electoral College on their heads. For example, the idea that one party prefers the president to be chosen by the Electoral College while the other wants it abolished is not true. Both parties have been in support of keeping the institution at different times. Whichever political party feels that they benefit the most from the Electoral College tends to be its biggest defender.
He also covers the National Popular Vote Compact, an Electoral College workaround, where states who represent at least a majority of the electoral votes pledge to send electors who will vote for the national popular vote winner even if that winner did not win the popular vote in their state. Wegman does a great job covering the merits and the deficiencies of the compact and provides a thorough overview of the support it has slowly received over time. It will be an interesting test to see what happens if the requisite number of states sign to the compact and if there's any political fallout from it.
Wegman’s chapter dispelling the myths of the popular vote was also particularly strong. He shows, contrary to popular belief, that voters in big cities would not swamp voters in small towns because there are less big city voters compared to everyone else.
The strongest argument for moving to a national popular vote, whether that be through the compact or constitutional amendment, is that more voters would participate since they would actually count unlike in the Electoral College winner take all system where if you are a Democrat in Mississippi or a Republican in Massachusetts your votes essentially don’t matter.
Wegman’s book is a great historical treatment of the Electoral College and makes a strong case why the popular vote is a better option. It should be read by everyone who thinks they have an opinion of the Electoral College.
Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and Jesse Wegman for the free ARC copy in exchange for a honest review.
December 17, 2019
"Calling [it] into question" by fools who don't understand why the electoral college was created in the first place, to keep the rights of rural states from being abused by the overpopulated states -- the only way to assure that the president represents all states. Without this the country would never have formed and no rural state would have joined the union. Throw it away, and with it the protection given to rural states, and I believe those states will have every right to withdraw from the Union.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Want to read
January 15, 2020So, this book doesn't even come out for another two months and the same troll who's left false reviews on other books about left-leaning political issues is back leaving more troll reviews. With that in mind, I've pre-ordered the book. If you're interested in reading this book, ignore the star rating.
- January 15, 2020
- January 15, 2020
April 1, 2020
This book focuses narrowly on the electoral college and expands on its Constitutional and political history and makes a very convincing case that it needs to be abolished--towards a popular vote. It's a great read.
October 27, 2020
Jesse Wegman takes a journalistic look at the US election process, showing why the Electoral College is outdated and ineffective. In particular, he takes issue with the “winner take all” method of awarding electoral votes to the winner of a state’s popular vote, which currently occurs in all states except two. This method tends to skew the results and occasionally the winner of the national popular vote does not win in the Electoral College. This has happened five times in our nation’s history, most recently in 2016.
Wegman takes the arguments often put forth in support of the electoral college and takes them apart one by one. He notes the ways the world has changed since it was originally conceived and, even then, it was controversial. In addition to the analysis of the Electoral College, he offers a history of the US Constitution, voting rights, and related Supreme Court decisions. The author clearly and cogently states his rationale. It offers food for thought. It will appeal to those interested in US history and politics.
Wegman takes the arguments often put forth in support of the electoral college and takes them apart one by one. He notes the ways the world has changed since it was originally conceived and, even then, it was controversial. In addition to the analysis of the Electoral College, he offers a history of the US Constitution, voting rights, and related Supreme Court decisions. The author clearly and cogently states his rationale. It offers food for thought. It will appeal to those interested in US history and politics.
July 31, 2020
Originally published on my book blog, TheBibliophage.com.
Jesse Wegman demystifies the Electoral College in his new book, Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College. No, really. He lays out all the myths I thought were true and some I didn’t. Then Wegman puts every one of them in perspective, clearly and even humorously. I finished the book ready to explain and argue points that previously felt unexplainable.
As so many recent political books do, Wegman begins with the post-election fugue state of late 2016. He reminds us of that possible option called “faithless Electors,” who are members of the Electoral College who decide not to vote as expected. Not that it actually went down that way. But for some, it was the most coverage of this voting scheme they’d seen.
Despite the reference to 2016, Wegman makes clear that the issues of a Presidential popular vote aren’t partisan. Different folks embraced this change at different times. For example, Democratic Senator Birch Bayh worked on changes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then Democrats tried after the Bush v. Gore election in 2000. Next was Republicans during the eight years Obama was in office. Both sides of the aisle see the downsides to the Electoral College.
Part of the reason for its bipartisan nature is that the history of the electoral college encompasses various belief sets. To help readers understand, Wegman uses documents from America’s founding fathers. I remember a fair amount about Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. But James Wilson was essentially new to me, even though he played a big role in this story. The idea of more than just two political parties makes an appearance here as well. As do issues of slave holding, rural voters, and enfranchisement of Black people and women.
Wegman also reminds us that virtually every other type of election is won or lost on the popular vote. We elect Governors, Senators, U.S. Representatives, and even school board members that way. It’s only the Presidential election that steps out of the pattern. Some smart folks found a way revise our voting without amending the Constitution. Wegman explains that too. And, his case for letting the people pick the President is airtight.
My conclusions
I read a lot of political books. Rarely are they this down to earth and approachable. If you espouse a popular vote methodology, you must be sure all kinds of people can grasp the change. So, Wegman writes with humor and straightforward explanations.
One of the reasons I read this book was because of We are Indivisible, which I read a few months back. In that book, they also make the case for abolishing the Electoral College. But it’s just one portion of a much larger narrative. I wanted more, and Wegman delivered in spades. In fact, I could easily read it one more time to commit the details to memory more completely.
As it happens, I listened to the audiobook for part of my reading. Wegman does a great job of using inflection and tone to convey his meanings. His narration makes the details easier to digest.
I recommend this to all my political wonk friends and readers. But what I really want is for every voter, or potential voter, to read this. If you feel like your vote doesn’t count, here’s the solution. Plenty of states are on board with the changes that Wegman explains. And isn’t it time our Presidential choice reflect the will of all the people, not just some of them?
Pair with We are Indivisble: A Blueprint for Democracy after Trump by Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg. For an alternate political escapade, try The Other Queen by Philippa Gregory. It will remind you why our founding fathers rebelled against England’s monarchy.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and the author for the opportunity to read a free digital ARC of this book in exchange for this honest review.
Jesse Wegman demystifies the Electoral College in his new book, Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College. No, really. He lays out all the myths I thought were true and some I didn’t. Then Wegman puts every one of them in perspective, clearly and even humorously. I finished the book ready to explain and argue points that previously felt unexplainable.
As so many recent political books do, Wegman begins with the post-election fugue state of late 2016. He reminds us of that possible option called “faithless Electors,” who are members of the Electoral College who decide not to vote as expected. Not that it actually went down that way. But for some, it was the most coverage of this voting scheme they’d seen.
Despite the reference to 2016, Wegman makes clear that the issues of a Presidential popular vote aren’t partisan. Different folks embraced this change at different times. For example, Democratic Senator Birch Bayh worked on changes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then Democrats tried after the Bush v. Gore election in 2000. Next was Republicans during the eight years Obama was in office. Both sides of the aisle see the downsides to the Electoral College.
Part of the reason for its bipartisan nature is that the history of the electoral college encompasses various belief sets. To help readers understand, Wegman uses documents from America’s founding fathers. I remember a fair amount about Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. But James Wilson was essentially new to me, even though he played a big role in this story. The idea of more than just two political parties makes an appearance here as well. As do issues of slave holding, rural voters, and enfranchisement of Black people and women.
Wegman also reminds us that virtually every other type of election is won or lost on the popular vote. We elect Governors, Senators, U.S. Representatives, and even school board members that way. It’s only the Presidential election that steps out of the pattern. Some smart folks found a way revise our voting without amending the Constitution. Wegman explains that too. And, his case for letting the people pick the President is airtight.
My conclusions
I read a lot of political books. Rarely are they this down to earth and approachable. If you espouse a popular vote methodology, you must be sure all kinds of people can grasp the change. So, Wegman writes with humor and straightforward explanations.
One of the reasons I read this book was because of We are Indivisible, which I read a few months back. In that book, they also make the case for abolishing the Electoral College. But it’s just one portion of a much larger narrative. I wanted more, and Wegman delivered in spades. In fact, I could easily read it one more time to commit the details to memory more completely.
As it happens, I listened to the audiobook for part of my reading. Wegman does a great job of using inflection and tone to convey his meanings. His narration makes the details easier to digest.
I recommend this to all my political wonk friends and readers. But what I really want is for every voter, or potential voter, to read this. If you feel like your vote doesn’t count, here’s the solution. Plenty of states are on board with the changes that Wegman explains. And isn’t it time our Presidential choice reflect the will of all the people, not just some of them?
Pair with We are Indivisble: A Blueprint for Democracy after Trump by Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg. For an alternate political escapade, try The Other Queen by Philippa Gregory. It will remind you why our founding fathers rebelled against England’s monarchy.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and the author for the opportunity to read a free digital ARC of this book in exchange for this honest review.
March 7, 2024
I believe this author could've simplified his points or
organized them better, for a more cohesive narrative.
Gave this 3.5 stars of 5.
The author Wegman said when the Founding Fathers
lived, 95% of those in the US lived in rural areas and
they could not have foreseen large cities.
Electoral votes were based on each state's population.
The framers of the US Constitution gave the Southern
states more electoral votes, b/c each slave was counted
in the state's population as 3/5 th of a free white man.
Electoral College (EC) was supposedly developed, in part,
to protect small states. But the winner-take-all aspect
of the EC, now in 48 of 50 states, has negated the voice
of small states.
The reality of US modern politics is a POTUS candidate
campaigns in the 12 or so states, with the most electoral
votes up for grabs. Often called the ''battleground states."
A Democrat knows California is a 'blue state' &locked-up,
so why campaign there? Ditto for the GOP in Calif. There
have been a few instances when the POTUS victor won the
electoral vote but lost the popular vote IE in 2000, 2016.
US Constitution indicated the POTUS victor must win at
least 270 electoral votes, but it was silent on the popular
vote.
Wegman discussed some alternatives to the EC such as the
National Popular Vote, also ranked-choice voting. He felt
the EC contributed to our narrow 2 -party system & allowed
politicos to avoid addressing the needs of various groups
such as Latinos, African Americans, LGBTQ etc. A GOP strat-
egist stated "Right now the Republican Party can exist &
flourish as basically a whites-only party. And I think that's
incredibly corrosive...." (71% mark).
Wegman noted that J. Hudak, a Brooking Institution senior
fellow, found that (US) Presidents consistently direct more
federal grants and dollars to battleground states than to
'safe states.' ( 70% mark).
Even though the US population has increased substantially
since 1911, the max number of US House members was
frozen at 435 since that time.
Battleground states in the 2016 POTUS election included:
Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida etc. For
2020 POTUS election, add these states to those: Arizona,
Georgia, No. Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada. Various
media outlets believe (my late father's home state of) PA.
may decide the 2020 election.
organized them better, for a more cohesive narrative.
Gave this 3.5 stars of 5.
The author Wegman said when the Founding Fathers
lived, 95% of those in the US lived in rural areas and
they could not have foreseen large cities.
Electoral votes were based on each state's population.
The framers of the US Constitution gave the Southern
states more electoral votes, b/c each slave was counted
in the state's population as 3/5 th of a free white man.
Electoral College (EC) was supposedly developed, in part,
to protect small states. But the winner-take-all aspect
of the EC, now in 48 of 50 states, has negated the voice
of small states.
The reality of US modern politics is a POTUS candidate
campaigns in the 12 or so states, with the most electoral
votes up for grabs. Often called the ''battleground states."
A Democrat knows California is a 'blue state' &locked-up,
so why campaign there? Ditto for the GOP in Calif. There
have been a few instances when the POTUS victor won the
electoral vote but lost the popular vote IE in 2000, 2016.
US Constitution indicated the POTUS victor must win at
least 270 electoral votes, but it was silent on the popular
vote.
Wegman discussed some alternatives to the EC such as the
National Popular Vote, also ranked-choice voting. He felt
the EC contributed to our narrow 2 -party system & allowed
politicos to avoid addressing the needs of various groups
such as Latinos, African Americans, LGBTQ etc. A GOP strat-
egist stated "Right now the Republican Party can exist &
flourish as basically a whites-only party. And I think that's
incredibly corrosive...." (71% mark).
Wegman noted that J. Hudak, a Brooking Institution senior
fellow, found that (US) Presidents consistently direct more
federal grants and dollars to battleground states than to
'safe states.' ( 70% mark).
Even though the US population has increased substantially
since 1911, the max number of US House members was
frozen at 435 since that time.
Battleground states in the 2016 POTUS election included:
Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida etc. For
2020 POTUS election, add these states to those: Arizona,
Georgia, No. Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada. Various
media outlets believe (my late father's home state of) PA.
may decide the 2020 election.
September 5, 2024
Persuasive. Needed a little tightening of the arguments or possibly just the chapter introductions, but otherwise excellent.
March 24, 2020
In “Let the People Pick the President,” Jesse Wegman argues for the abolition of the current system for choosing our chief executive: the Electoral College. Wegman’s new book, an expanded version of a New York Times editorial of the same name, is part history, part myth-busting treatise. The author’s bias is noted, left-leaning, and surfaces occasionally, but as he says: the democratic value of “one person, one vote”—codified in Reynolds vs. Sims on March 18, 1963—ought to be nonpartisan. We each want our vote to matter, regardless of who we are, what we believe, or where we live.
Through his clear and memorable writing, Wegman guides the reader through the history of the Electoral College: its founding at the eleventh hour as the most-discussed single topic of the Constitutional convention through contested presidential elections and the expansion of voting rights over the next 200+ years. He shows how the Electoral College has served to entrench political power in a two-party system, and introduces some historical figures involved in the over 700 attempts to reform or abolish it.
Wegman’s strongest addition mirrors John Koza’s Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote: a section dispelling common myths about the Electoral College. He writes this section as a conversation between himself and a hypothetical family member who is not as familiar with the College, showing how Wegman would address each counterargument to installing a national popular vote.
In order to change something, you must first understand it. “Let the People Pick the President” helps to unpack the convoluted US presidential election system. Regardless of your political leanings, you will come away with a better understanding of US history, presidential elections, and the debate around a fundamental democratic question: Who gets to pick the President?
Overall: A well-researched and persuasive argument for amending a critical facet of US democracy. ★★★★★.
Thank you to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the opportunity to review this book in exchange for my honest review.
Through his clear and memorable writing, Wegman guides the reader through the history of the Electoral College: its founding at the eleventh hour as the most-discussed single topic of the Constitutional convention through contested presidential elections and the expansion of voting rights over the next 200+ years. He shows how the Electoral College has served to entrench political power in a two-party system, and introduces some historical figures involved in the over 700 attempts to reform or abolish it.
Wegman’s strongest addition mirrors John Koza’s Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote: a section dispelling common myths about the Electoral College. He writes this section as a conversation between himself and a hypothetical family member who is not as familiar with the College, showing how Wegman would address each counterargument to installing a national popular vote.
In order to change something, you must first understand it. “Let the People Pick the President” helps to unpack the convoluted US presidential election system. Regardless of your political leanings, you will come away with a better understanding of US history, presidential elections, and the debate around a fundamental democratic question: Who gets to pick the President?
Overall: A well-researched and persuasive argument for amending a critical facet of US democracy. ★★★★★.
Thank you to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the opportunity to review this book in exchange for my honest review.
October 30, 2020
“If Trump had won popular vote and lost the Electoral College, this would’ve passed,” Saul Anuzis told me. “We had seven Republican states on the verge of passing it.”
Instead, many Republicans quickly came to see the compact as nothing more than Democratic sour grapes, an effort to undermine President Trump. This infuriates Koza. “It makes no sense. The people who are actually being helped by this bill are the ones who are opposing it. It’s that simple: Republicans in blue states. Theirs is the vote that’s being canceled out.”
In a Jewish family, there was a tradition to tie a piece of yarn in the handle of the dutch oven when shabat meal was being baked. One day the daughter of the family asked her mother why this was. She said "I don't know, I suppose it has some deep spiritual meaning. Let's ask your aunt." They did, and the aunt didn't know either. They asked their mother, and she said "when we lived in Russia, everyone took the pot to the village bakery to be baked in the community oven overnight. We used the yarn to mark the pots."
Electoral college is a bit like that yarn, except that it leaves nasty flavor to the food.
Read this book. It's OK if you think it's "Democratic sour grapes", but read it, and verify the information given. Don't just brush it off, verify it. Use any sources you consider adequate and accurate.
Then make an educated decision about the electoral college.
It's good to hold on to traditions, but it's not good to hold on to traditions just to hold on to traditions. If you are OK with the latest model of a car or a television, you should be OK with the latest model of government as well.
Instead, many Republicans quickly came to see the compact as nothing more than Democratic sour grapes, an effort to undermine President Trump. This infuriates Koza. “It makes no sense. The people who are actually being helped by this bill are the ones who are opposing it. It’s that simple: Republicans in blue states. Theirs is the vote that’s being canceled out.”
In a Jewish family, there was a tradition to tie a piece of yarn in the handle of the dutch oven when shabat meal was being baked. One day the daughter of the family asked her mother why this was. She said "I don't know, I suppose it has some deep spiritual meaning. Let's ask your aunt." They did, and the aunt didn't know either. They asked their mother, and she said "when we lived in Russia, everyone took the pot to the village bakery to be baked in the community oven overnight. We used the yarn to mark the pots."
Electoral college is a bit like that yarn, except that it leaves nasty flavor to the food.
Read this book. It's OK if you think it's "Democratic sour grapes", but read it, and verify the information given. Don't just brush it off, verify it. Use any sources you consider adequate and accurate.
Then make an educated decision about the electoral college.
It's good to hold on to traditions, but it's not good to hold on to traditions just to hold on to traditions. If you are OK with the latest model of a car or a television, you should be OK with the latest model of government as well.
July 28, 2020
The majority of Americans favor direct popular election of presidents, and have done so consistently since the question has been polled. The Electoral College has its defenders, particularly from the party that, since 1992, has lost the national popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections. (Albeit that same party won the popular vote in five of six before '92.)
A safe prediction for the 2020 election is that Biden will win the popular vote, making it seven out of eight times the Democrat won by vote of the people. It's not the popular vote that determines the outcome, however. If the election is close, as in 2016, then Trump could be elected again due to the vagaries of the Electoral College (EC).
Those vagaries, the history behind them, and the opportunities for reform are described in this fascinating book, Let the People Pick the President by Jesse Wegman.
Most readers may be surprised to learn that EC was a pro-slavery tool because it gave more than a dozen extra electoral votes to the southern states due to their slaves, which were counted for represen- tation under the notorious three-fifths clause.
When the Constitutional Convention debated how to elect the president, direct popular election was proposed. James Madison, known as "the Father of the Constitution," explained the obstacle:
“There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.”
In other words, though the populations in the North and South were about equal, some one-third of those living in the South were slaves. Because of its large nonvoting slave population, the South would be outvoted under a popular-vote system. The solution was an indirect method of choosing the president, one that could leverage the three-fifths compromise, which increased the size of the South’s congressional delegation by 42 percent.
It is no coincidence that only two presidents in the first half century did not own slaves -- the Adams.
Pennsylvania and Virginia had about equal white populations in 1790, but Virginia had six extra seats in the House, and thus six extra electors, which helps to explain why four of the first five presidents were from Virginia, and none from Pennsylvania.
The number of Electors from each State is equal to the number of House members plus Senators from each state. Each state gets at least one Representative, even when its population is less than the average in House districts from bigger states. Each state also has two Senators.
That means Wyoming has the same number of Senators as California, which has 70 times the population. Consequently, the tiny population of Wyoming has more than triple the clout per person when it comes to Electors. In Wyoming, there are 3 electors and 589,000 residents, or 196,333 residents per elector. By contrast, California 718,909 residents per elector, which is 3.6 times more people per elector than in Wyoming.
All states with small populations enjoy overrepresentation in the electoral college. It's a form of affirmative action that conservatives favor. If affirmative action is justified for folks in small rural states, however, then why not for racial minorities who have been discriminated against by the majority? It's the same principle, after all, of protecting a vulnerable minority.
It's not surprising that whites benefit from rural overrepresentation. Professors Andrew Gelman and Pierre-Antoine Kremp find that “per voter, whites have 16 percent more power than blacks once the Electoral College is taken into consideration, 28 percent more power than Latinos, and 57 percent more power than those who fall into the other category." So the system that originated as a pro-slavery tool still preserves white privilege.
The principle of one person, one vote is rooted in the founding value that all men are created equal. Our votes should be equally valuable.The EC violates this core democratic principle. Our votes do not all count the same, and the candidate with the most votes can lose.
"The weight of a citizen's vote cannot be made to depend upon where he lives," said the SCOTUS in Reynolds v Sims, which required equal populations in state legislative districts. Madison wrote that "the will of the majority is the vital principle of republican government."
What divides the two sides in this debate is whether or not they support the democratic principles of one person, one vote and majority rule. People who embrace those principles favor reforming or abolishing the unique American method of selecting presidents. People less committed to them usually support the status quo, particularly when they enjoy an advantage they fear they would lose under one person, one vote.
Twice in sixteen years -- in 2000 and in 2016 -- the candidate with fewer popular votes was elected. Consequently, the party that has trouble winning the popular vote can be counted on the fiercely defend the status quo. Had Donald Trump won the popular vote but lost in the EC, there would be more Republican support for reform
Republicans did not always oppose direct popular election. In 1969, the last time a popular vote amendment came up for a vote in Congress, it had the support of President Nixon, George H.W. Bush, Gerald Ford, and Bob Dole. About four out of five Americans supported reform, as did both the US Chamber and the AFL-CIO.
There have been more amendments (700+) proposed in Congress to change the EC than any other constitutional provision. The current reform effort, however, does not require amending the Constitution. It's an ingenious plan called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
When it came up for a vote before the Illinois General Assembly in 2007, it enjoyed the support of the GOP Senate minority leader at the time and from the senator who currently leads the Senate Republicans. The vote was more partisan in the House, however, where just one GOP representative supported it. That lone Republican was this reviewer.
If every popular vote in the nation were equally valuable, as it would be under the NPV interstate compact, then candidates would campaign nationwide instead of focusing almost exclusively on a handful of swing states as they do now. Voter turnout would increase once votes matter in every state, not just in Ohio, Florida and eight or nine other swing states.
Defenders of the EC claim that it's essential to the republic to keep this restriction on the popular vote. Yet many other restrictions on democracy the founders put in place have been repealed.
Originally only white men with property were eligible to vote, but the property requirement was mostly gone by the 1830s. Was that restriction needed to preserve the republic? Conservatives of that era thought so.
Initially state legislatures choose electors, not the voters. That changed in the early 1800s to allow voters to select the electors.
The 15th Amendment gave black men the vote. The 17th Amendment gave voters the right to elect their US senators. The 19th Amendment gave women the vote. Amendment 26 gave 18-year olds the vote.
In every case, opponents of the democratic reforms predicted doom for the republic, and claimed the founders knew best. But the opponents were wrong then, and they're wrong now. ###
A safe prediction for the 2020 election is that Biden will win the popular vote, making it seven out of eight times the Democrat won by vote of the people. It's not the popular vote that determines the outcome, however. If the election is close, as in 2016, then Trump could be elected again due to the vagaries of the Electoral College (EC).
Those vagaries, the history behind them, and the opportunities for reform are described in this fascinating book, Let the People Pick the President by Jesse Wegman.
Most readers may be surprised to learn that EC was a pro-slavery tool because it gave more than a dozen extra electoral votes to the southern states due to their slaves, which were counted for represen- tation under the notorious three-fifths clause.
When the Constitutional Convention debated how to elect the president, direct popular election was proposed. James Madison, known as "the Father of the Constitution," explained the obstacle:
“There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.”
In other words, though the populations in the North and South were about equal, some one-third of those living in the South were slaves. Because of its large nonvoting slave population, the South would be outvoted under a popular-vote system. The solution was an indirect method of choosing the president, one that could leverage the three-fifths compromise, which increased the size of the South’s congressional delegation by 42 percent.
It is no coincidence that only two presidents in the first half century did not own slaves -- the Adams.
Pennsylvania and Virginia had about equal white populations in 1790, but Virginia had six extra seats in the House, and thus six extra electors, which helps to explain why four of the first five presidents were from Virginia, and none from Pennsylvania.
The number of Electors from each State is equal to the number of House members plus Senators from each state. Each state gets at least one Representative, even when its population is less than the average in House districts from bigger states. Each state also has two Senators.
That means Wyoming has the same number of Senators as California, which has 70 times the population. Consequently, the tiny population of Wyoming has more than triple the clout per person when it comes to Electors. In Wyoming, there are 3 electors and 589,000 residents, or 196,333 residents per elector. By contrast, California 718,909 residents per elector, which is 3.6 times more people per elector than in Wyoming.
All states with small populations enjoy overrepresentation in the electoral college. It's a form of affirmative action that conservatives favor. If affirmative action is justified for folks in small rural states, however, then why not for racial minorities who have been discriminated against by the majority? It's the same principle, after all, of protecting a vulnerable minority.
It's not surprising that whites benefit from rural overrepresentation. Professors Andrew Gelman and Pierre-Antoine Kremp find that “per voter, whites have 16 percent more power than blacks once the Electoral College is taken into consideration, 28 percent more power than Latinos, and 57 percent more power than those who fall into the other category." So the system that originated as a pro-slavery tool still preserves white privilege.
The principle of one person, one vote is rooted in the founding value that all men are created equal. Our votes should be equally valuable.The EC violates this core democratic principle. Our votes do not all count the same, and the candidate with the most votes can lose.
"The weight of a citizen's vote cannot be made to depend upon where he lives," said the SCOTUS in Reynolds v Sims, which required equal populations in state legislative districts. Madison wrote that "the will of the majority is the vital principle of republican government."
What divides the two sides in this debate is whether or not they support the democratic principles of one person, one vote and majority rule. People who embrace those principles favor reforming or abolishing the unique American method of selecting presidents. People less committed to them usually support the status quo, particularly when they enjoy an advantage they fear they would lose under one person, one vote.
Twice in sixteen years -- in 2000 and in 2016 -- the candidate with fewer popular votes was elected. Consequently, the party that has trouble winning the popular vote can be counted on the fiercely defend the status quo. Had Donald Trump won the popular vote but lost in the EC, there would be more Republican support for reform
Republicans did not always oppose direct popular election. In 1969, the last time a popular vote amendment came up for a vote in Congress, it had the support of President Nixon, George H.W. Bush, Gerald Ford, and Bob Dole. About four out of five Americans supported reform, as did both the US Chamber and the AFL-CIO.
There have been more amendments (700+) proposed in Congress to change the EC than any other constitutional provision. The current reform effort, however, does not require amending the Constitution. It's an ingenious plan called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
When it came up for a vote before the Illinois General Assembly in 2007, it enjoyed the support of the GOP Senate minority leader at the time and from the senator who currently leads the Senate Republicans. The vote was more partisan in the House, however, where just one GOP representative supported it. That lone Republican was this reviewer.
If every popular vote in the nation were equally valuable, as it would be under the NPV interstate compact, then candidates would campaign nationwide instead of focusing almost exclusively on a handful of swing states as they do now. Voter turnout would increase once votes matter in every state, not just in Ohio, Florida and eight or nine other swing states.
Defenders of the EC claim that it's essential to the republic to keep this restriction on the popular vote. Yet many other restrictions on democracy the founders put in place have been repealed.
Originally only white men with property were eligible to vote, but the property requirement was mostly gone by the 1830s. Was that restriction needed to preserve the republic? Conservatives of that era thought so.
Initially state legislatures choose electors, not the voters. That changed in the early 1800s to allow voters to select the electors.
The 15th Amendment gave black men the vote. The 17th Amendment gave voters the right to elect their US senators. The 19th Amendment gave women the vote. Amendment 26 gave 18-year olds the vote.
In every case, opponents of the democratic reforms predicted doom for the republic, and claimed the founders knew best. But the opponents were wrong then, and they're wrong now. ###
June 15, 2020
Everyone interested in the odd Electoral College which determines the outcome of the American Presidential elections should read this excellent book.
April 2, 2020
The Electoral College is an outmoded, terrible institution for all the reasons Wegman persuasively lays out here. Any system that renders two-thirds of the voters immediately irrelevant before the election even begins can't be seen as democratic. But let's face it, it ain't going anywhere until Republicans get the short end of the stick, at which point the 28th Amendment abolishing the EC in favor a national popular vote will be ratified faster than you can say Brett Kavanaugh. Until then, we turn our lonely eyes to 78,000 voters in three states. Are you excited yet?
October 2, 2020
Couldn’t imagine a better book for Americans to read in 2020. The national popular vote would benefit all of us—Democrats and Republicans, small states and large states. Highly recommend reading this to find out more for yourself—if you need me, I’ll be advocating for a ranked choice, national popular vote election in 2024 (or at the very least, in my lifetime).
January 27, 2021
Eliminating the Electoral College isn’t a partisan endeavor. It’s existence is (and always has been) an important problem for all Americans, regardless of political partiality.
The EC is mathematically nonsensical, politically inequitable, and the purpose for its invention is morally questionable.
This book masterfully explains exactly why.
The EC is mathematically nonsensical, politically inequitable, and the purpose for its invention is morally questionable.
This book masterfully explains exactly why.
July 13, 2020
The framers of the Constitution battled over it. Lawmakers have tried to amend or abolish it more than 700 times. To this day, millions of voters, and even members of Congress, misunderstand how it works. It deepens our national divide and distorts the core democratic principles of political equality and majority rule. How can we tolerate the Electoral College when every vote does not count the same, and the candidate who gets the most votes can lose?
Twice in the last five elections, the Electoral College has overridden the popular vote, calling the integrity of the entire system into question—and creating a false picture of a country divided into bright red and blue blocks when in fact we are purple from coast to coast. Even when the popular-vote winner becomes president, tens of millions of Americans—Republicans and Democrats alike—find that their votes didn't matter. And, with statewide winner-take-all rules, only a handful of battleground states ultimately decide who will become president.
Now, as political passions reach a boiling point at the dawn of the 2020 race, the message from the American people is clear: The way we vote for the only official whose job it is to represent all Americans is neither fair nor just. Major reform is needed—now. Isn't it time to let the people pick the president?
I thought Wegman did a great job of being concise and to the point when trying to reason out his argument. I appreciated how the message came across and how straightforward it was. The book was a little repetitive.
Twice in the last five elections, the Electoral College has overridden the popular vote, calling the integrity of the entire system into question—and creating a false picture of a country divided into bright red and blue blocks when in fact we are purple from coast to coast. Even when the popular-vote winner becomes president, tens of millions of Americans—Republicans and Democrats alike—find that their votes didn't matter. And, with statewide winner-take-all rules, only a handful of battleground states ultimately decide who will become president.
Now, as political passions reach a boiling point at the dawn of the 2020 race, the message from the American people is clear: The way we vote for the only official whose job it is to represent all Americans is neither fair nor just. Major reform is needed—now. Isn't it time to let the people pick the president?
I thought Wegman did a great job of being concise and to the point when trying to reason out his argument. I appreciated how the message came across and how straightforward it was. The book was a little repetitive.
October 17, 2021
You can come across any number of books on the Electoral College that are enlightening, but until I stumbled upon 'Let the People Pick the President' I had not found one that could be fairly described as compelling, much less a page-turner.
Jesse Wegman takes history and matches it with logic to present an expertly written and masterfully argued case as to why the Electoral College should go the way of the Dodo bird. In the end, you may not be persuaded to Wegman's cause but you will have to be completely close-minded to not at least question why we still select our presidents through a system that, novelist and 1968 Pennsylvania elector, James Michener described as a "time bomb lodged near the heart of our nation."
Michener's fears almost came true with Donald Trump's almost-successful political coup and the January 6 Capitol insurrection. The rapidity in which Trump's Big Lie has become gospel "truth" among the Republican base and state officials may very well make Michener's nightmare a reality in 2024.
What you will learn from 'Let the People Vote' is in the years after the Constitution's ratification, many of our framers - James Madison among them - realized the Electoral College was flawed. In truth, it never once worked out as it was haphazardly envisioned in the closing, rushed days of the constitutional convention. Madison and other framers called for reforms. They offered proposed constitutional amendments. Some even came around to calling for its abolition. They were ignored. Thus we have kept the bizarre system they gave us. And now we are seeing the system weaponized to undermine future presidential elections and imperil American democracy.
Thus Wegman's work, which was published months before the 2020 election, takes on even greater import, making 'Let the People Pick the President' that rare political science book that can rightfully be categorized as indispensable.
Jesse Wegman takes history and matches it with logic to present an expertly written and masterfully argued case as to why the Electoral College should go the way of the Dodo bird. In the end, you may not be persuaded to Wegman's cause but you will have to be completely close-minded to not at least question why we still select our presidents through a system that, novelist and 1968 Pennsylvania elector, James Michener described as a "time bomb lodged near the heart of our nation."
Michener's fears almost came true with Donald Trump's almost-successful political coup and the January 6 Capitol insurrection. The rapidity in which Trump's Big Lie has become gospel "truth" among the Republican base and state officials may very well make Michener's nightmare a reality in 2024.
What you will learn from 'Let the People Vote' is in the years after the Constitution's ratification, many of our framers - James Madison among them - realized the Electoral College was flawed. In truth, it never once worked out as it was haphazardly envisioned in the closing, rushed days of the constitutional convention. Madison and other framers called for reforms. They offered proposed constitutional amendments. Some even came around to calling for its abolition. They were ignored. Thus we have kept the bizarre system they gave us. And now we are seeing the system weaponized to undermine future presidential elections and imperil American democracy.
Thus Wegman's work, which was published months before the 2020 election, takes on even greater import, making 'Let the People Pick the President' that rare political science book that can rightfully be categorized as indispensable.
August 4, 2025
Haven’t read a non fiction in a while and thought it was time - learned so much! I of course thought that the electoral college is ridiculous, but honestly because I have been burnt by it before. But this book excellently took down so many myths. A national popular vote for president would encourage presidential candidates to stir up support from every state (not just swing states), would not benefit one party, and can be accomplished without a constitutional amendment! & so many more but would recommend this book - not too dense and very conversational.
Read via hardcover from the library with simultaneous audiobook because my attention span needed something to keep it moving forward 😂
Read via hardcover from the library with simultaneous audiobook because my attention span needed something to keep it moving forward 😂
March 23, 2025
super intriguing. think hes right about almost everything (repubs do benefit from the college bc they benefit from voter disenfranchisement bc their policies are fundamentally non populist. and i’ll die on that hill) hes right that it is about democracy and egalitarianism but the “both sides ism” was a little tiring. (wegman admits that the college’s founded deeply benefited slavers but shies away from the idea that it still benefits the party of white supremacists today.)
excited to call my state reps about the national popular vote interstate compact
excited to call my state reps about the national popular vote interstate compact
January 14, 2021
A friend lent me this book and has been challenging me to read it for several months. I have been slightly more inclined to keep the electoral college so this tome had some persuading to do. I found the book to be very well written and well argued. Much of the first half of the book details the history of the electoral college which was more interesting than I expected. In the end I think Wegman ultimately makes the case successfully. I rate this book 3.5 stars because the topic is sometimes a little dry. If the electoral college and American elections interest you the book will be a big hit for you. If the country wants to do the most fair thing for every voter, electing the president by the popular vote is correct. The issue remains whether people and political actors are willing to chose fair over potentially losing an advantage.
September 2, 2020
Jam packed with information, history, and thought provoking points. I probably need to read it again to grasp all the details. Enjoyed it!
January 8, 2023
“Whether our side wins or loses, we must see the outcome as fair. And outcomes are seen as fair when the process that led to them is seen as just.”
November 2, 2022
This book brings up many pros and cons of the Electoral College and National Popular Vote. In the end it continues to add to my frustrations of partisan politics in this country. I kept telling myself a quote from early in the book, "If we really thought the Electoral College was the best way to choose a president, we wouldn't have tried to reform or abolish it more than 700 times."
March 28, 2020
A timely, clear and well-argued book supporting a direct vote by the US citizens to elect a US President. The author presents the historical context, current status, and strong rationale for a change to direct election. A great read for people interested in knowing more about this piece of the Constitution, and a way to continue the arch of history to more inclusion government, where every vote matters, no matter where you live.
The author starts by introducing us to James Wilson, a signatory of the US Declaration of Independence, elected twice to the Continental Congress, and also a delegate to the 1787 Philadelphia Constitutional Convention. He had strong views about the executive branch and argued for a direct election of the President by the people. And Wilson was on the committee that produced the first draft of the Constitution. The author (Wegman) is justly fascinated with Wilson because of the influence his ideas had on the Constitution and his relative lack of recognition today, likely because he died a debtor after a financial crisis.
The author talked about the design of the Electoral College, one of the last pieces of the Constitution to be constructed and agreed upon at the Constitutional Convention. Most American’s probably do not know the history of the Electoral College; the calculation for how many electors each state receives and that the electors, voted on by the people, select the President (this is overly simplified – and the author describes this more). Furthermore, it is the states, not the Constitutions, the decides how the electors are chosen and allocated (e.g., winner take all, or proportionally).
Over the years, with the arch of history bending to a more inclusive electorate (former slaves, women, younger voters), direct election of Senators (1913, 17th Amendment to the constitution), many attempts have been made to also replace the Electoral College with a direct election of the President, one of the one in my lifetime by Birch Bayh (1970).
So why hasn’t the United States changed the Electoral College? There are multiple reasons, usually a fear of the unknown, but more importantly a resistance by a strong enough group (which changes with each attempt) thinking that they will lose power.
The author has two chapters that talk about the myths about the Electoral College and why they are myths. These chapters are very nicely presented. For an example of a myth: The Electoral College forces candidates to campaign and win support all over the country. FALSE.
In the current political climate, many people think that a constitutional amendment is not going to be possible. BUT! There is another approach, which keeps intact the Electoral College (much against the subtitle of the book), but changes the debate to groups and a compact among states, called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/). This group was organized by John Koza, and is an agreement that states in the compact would award (allocate) ALL the states Electors to the winner of the national popular vote. Currently several states have enacted this concept into law.
And the author final page eloquently summarizes his support for the popular vote. Most convincing for me is that under the current system, candidates, all of whom have finite time and budgets, focus almost all of their efforts on a few states, writing off other states as already in their camp, or no way to win. Since the current system is winner take all, spending time in those states makes little sense. What results is that the candidates focus on the issues of a few states (e.g., 12, and later 6) but if they win, they need to govern 50 states (at least that is the principle).
A great read for people interested in knowing more about this piece of the Constitution, and a way to continue the arch of history to more inclusion government, where every vote matters, no matter where you live.
The author starts by introducing us to James Wilson, a signatory of the US Declaration of Independence, elected twice to the Continental Congress, and also a delegate to the 1787 Philadelphia Constitutional Convention. He had strong views about the executive branch and argued for a direct election of the President by the people. And Wilson was on the committee that produced the first draft of the Constitution. The author (Wegman) is justly fascinated with Wilson because of the influence his ideas had on the Constitution and his relative lack of recognition today, likely because he died a debtor after a financial crisis.
The author talked about the design of the Electoral College, one of the last pieces of the Constitution to be constructed and agreed upon at the Constitutional Convention. Most American’s probably do not know the history of the Electoral College; the calculation for how many electors each state receives and that the electors, voted on by the people, select the President (this is overly simplified – and the author describes this more). Furthermore, it is the states, not the Constitutions, the decides how the electors are chosen and allocated (e.g., winner take all, or proportionally).
Over the years, with the arch of history bending to a more inclusive electorate (former slaves, women, younger voters), direct election of Senators (1913, 17th Amendment to the constitution), many attempts have been made to also replace the Electoral College with a direct election of the President, one of the one in my lifetime by Birch Bayh (1970).
So why hasn’t the United States changed the Electoral College? There are multiple reasons, usually a fear of the unknown, but more importantly a resistance by a strong enough group (which changes with each attempt) thinking that they will lose power.
The author has two chapters that talk about the myths about the Electoral College and why they are myths. These chapters are very nicely presented. For an example of a myth: The Electoral College forces candidates to campaign and win support all over the country. FALSE.
In the current political climate, many people think that a constitutional amendment is not going to be possible. BUT! There is another approach, which keeps intact the Electoral College (much against the subtitle of the book), but changes the debate to groups and a compact among states, called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/). This group was organized by John Koza, and is an agreement that states in the compact would award (allocate) ALL the states Electors to the winner of the national popular vote. Currently several states have enacted this concept into law.
And the author final page eloquently summarizes his support for the popular vote. Most convincing for me is that under the current system, candidates, all of whom have finite time and budgets, focus almost all of their efforts on a few states, writing off other states as already in their camp, or no way to win. Since the current system is winner take all, spending time in those states makes little sense. What results is that the candidates focus on the issues of a few states (e.g., 12, and later 6) but if they win, they need to govern 50 states (at least that is the principle).
A great read for people interested in knowing more about this piece of the Constitution, and a way to continue the arch of history to more inclusion government, where every vote matters, no matter where you live.
May 25, 2020
Electoral College is probably the most convoluted, unintuitive, and mostly debated aspect of American politics. As an immigrant, I never understood why it exists in the first place. Like many people, I thought it was put into place by the framers of this country for a good reason. In this brief book, Wegman shows that is not the case. At all. Electoral College is a vestige of slaveholders’ will to perpetually oppress voters and protect white supremacy of this country. Today, the College serves no one; not republicans, not democrats, and certainly not independents. Wegman uses simple logic to debunk the many myths of this archaic compromise and offers a path toward a political system that is truly representative of people’s will. Now more than ever, this is a book every American should read.
February 12, 2020
Despite the fact I now have nightmares, after reading this book, I realize the truth can be unsettling. But, dealing with truth is how one survives, no matter how unwanted it is.
this is not a partisan political book. It is the impartial description I'd a process that has been kept complicated and shrouded in obfuscation for the profit of a few.
For years I've listened to pundits attempt explain the process of presidential elections and the purpose of the electoral college. All seemed to say the same thing, but this far, until this text, have I found anyone who could clearly explain the relevance and portent of the system.
I like that there is copious validation of information and apparent scholarly research.
Outstanding are a few quotes:
(page 247) "The people who control the outcome of the current process are a tiny fraction of citizens - at most a few hundred thousand in a handful of states - who are fairly uninterested and uninformed about the candidates, and are In no way representative of the interests of removes of the rest g the country."
(page 251) "When every vote counts and every vote matters, more people vote. This isn't a theory: it happens in every presidential election."
Notes are provided, and there is an index. And for us dreamers, a final chapter on Imagining a National Popular Vote.
this is not a partisan political book. It is the impartial description I'd a process that has been kept complicated and shrouded in obfuscation for the profit of a few.
For years I've listened to pundits attempt explain the process of presidential elections and the purpose of the electoral college. All seemed to say the same thing, but this far, until this text, have I found anyone who could clearly explain the relevance and portent of the system.
I like that there is copious validation of information and apparent scholarly research.
Outstanding are a few quotes:
(page 247) "The people who control the outcome of the current process are a tiny fraction of citizens - at most a few hundred thousand in a handful of states - who are fairly uninterested and uninformed about the candidates, and are In no way representative of the interests of removes of the rest g the country."
(page 251) "When every vote counts and every vote matters, more people vote. This isn't a theory: it happens in every presidential election."
Notes are provided, and there is an index. And for us dreamers, a final chapter on Imagining a National Popular Vote.
November 10, 2020
Exactly what I was looking for!
Wegman takes the reader through the history of the Electoral College, the past hiccups and challenges to the system (that I was unaware of!). He then progresses to the myths of why we need this system and why there is need for change. Wegman lays all the facts out for the reader, walking through the issues and explains how a National Popular Vote could help solve some of the issues. The issues that mattered most to me were Candidates campaigning pretty exclusively in swing states and the facts that swing states get special attention throughout terms to help when election time rolls around. Wegman gives examples to support these points, which strengthened my support to move in this direction.
During the second half of the book, Wegman mentions John Koza, who has started to dedicate his life towards campaigning for National Popular Vote. He has written a book with bipartisan support, called "Every Vote Equal." I actually was able to find Koza's website, where he has the book available FOR FREE - https://www.every-vote-equal.com/
In my opinion - this is a MUST read for every citizen!
EDIT: I forgot to add two thoughts..
1 - KUDOS to Wegman for discussing Ranked Choice Voting!
2 - I was a little upset that Wegman didn't talk more about 3rd parties, he did mention them but left out the facts that they are limited by laws enacted by both Democrats and Republicans to keep their voices silent... This election is starting to show that Democrats will go to no end to keep Green Candidates off the ballots - NOT GOOD. Locally we also have officials lying to potential candidates to keep the current State Senator running unopposed! Little things like this were not mentioned and I think it would have really opened the eyes to many people who disregard 3rd parties because "they can't win" - it's true because the system has evolved to bar them from even competing!
Wegman takes the reader through the history of the Electoral College, the past hiccups and challenges to the system (that I was unaware of!). He then progresses to the myths of why we need this system and why there is need for change. Wegman lays all the facts out for the reader, walking through the issues and explains how a National Popular Vote could help solve some of the issues. The issues that mattered most to me were Candidates campaigning pretty exclusively in swing states and the facts that swing states get special attention throughout terms to help when election time rolls around. Wegman gives examples to support these points, which strengthened my support to move in this direction.
During the second half of the book, Wegman mentions John Koza, who has started to dedicate his life towards campaigning for National Popular Vote. He has written a book with bipartisan support, called "Every Vote Equal." I actually was able to find Koza's website, where he has the book available FOR FREE - https://www.every-vote-equal.com/
In my opinion - this is a MUST read for every citizen!
EDIT: I forgot to add two thoughts..
1 - KUDOS to Wegman for discussing Ranked Choice Voting!
2 - I was a little upset that Wegman didn't talk more about 3rd parties, he did mention them but left out the facts that they are limited by laws enacted by both Democrats and Republicans to keep their voices silent... This election is starting to show that Democrats will go to no end to keep Green Candidates off the ballots - NOT GOOD. Locally we also have officials lying to potential candidates to keep the current State Senator running unopposed! Little things like this were not mentioned and I think it would have really opened the eyes to many people who disregard 3rd parties because "they can't win" - it's true because the system has evolved to bar them from even competing!
March 12, 2022
I live in Massachusetts. During the last election, my friend was a volunteer poll worker in her town. Our state was called about two hours before they finished counting the ballots. It made her feel like the votes that she was counting were pointless.
This book explains why that happens (the electoral college) and gives some pretty strong points on why we should abolish the college and go to a direct, popular vote. Before reading this, I thought the electoral college was unnecessary. After reading it, I am convinced that it needs to go. Everyone should have a voice, and everyone should read this book.
I won this book in a Goodreads Giveaway.
This book explains why that happens (the electoral college) and gives some pretty strong points on why we should abolish the college and go to a direct, popular vote. Before reading this, I thought the electoral college was unnecessary. After reading it, I am convinced that it needs to go. Everyone should have a voice, and everyone should read this book.
I won this book in a Goodreads Giveaway.
April 5, 2020
I have been a tepid supporter of the electoral college, believing the myth that somehow the smaller states needed its protections, but this book completely blows away every myth about the soundness of the college and lays bare its true origins and the reasons it is so hard to get rid of it. Basically, the Founding Fathers had gotten to the end of the convention without deciding on a means of electing the President, after spending the summer arguing and arguing over it, until they were going in circles. They picked the college because they were tired, hot and wanted to go home. As for its endurance: it's strictly partisan. One party or the other sees it as a benefit to them and will not agree to do away with it. For now, it's the Republicans, having won two elections in the last five after losing the popular vote. The other persuasive argument in this book is how to get to a popular vote Presidential Election without a Constitutional amendment. It's called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which is simply a contract entered into by the states in which they pledge their electors to whomever wins the popular vote. Several states have already signed on. When states with a combined total of 271 electoral votes have agreed to it, it will go into effect. Wegman thoroughly explains how it works and rebuts the most common arguments against it. This is a truly enlightening book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 233 reviews