A recording of the conference is available at https://www.crowdcast.io/e/electoralcollegereform2020.
The index provides brief comments/summaries of substantive statements of participants. Introductory material is not indexed. We experienced some technical difficulties in Session 1; there are several gaps there.
Opening Comments. Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon 7:30-11.45
Passionate about presidential election reform—one of his top issues. Supporter of Electoral College Reform since 1992—Clinton staffers cheered fact that non-majority election would send the election to House, where (then-in-the-polls) third place Clinton would win—outrageous feature of Electoral College. Strong support of Interstate Compact and “jump ott the cliff together” at 270 electoral votes; not yet persuaded by “go it alone.”
Session 1: Race and the Electoral College
Jesse Wegman: 19:40-25:10; 26:10-27:07; 29:40-33:45
Founders didn’t really know what they were doing; incorporation of the 3/5 compromise; statements by founders re slavery; disagreement among scholars; emergence of winner-take-all; the Slave Power—500,000 slaves yielded 15 electoral votes; white supremacist power enhanced after Civil War—Blacks counted as 5/5 while voting was systematically suppressed, all the way up to 1965; in 1969-70 white supremacists killed the best opportunity for reform
Alexander Keyssar: 35:30-48:30
Post-“Redemption” (by 1890 at the latest) until the 1960s, South was a bulwark against any change. The systematic suppression of the Black vote led to the Democratic Party Solid South. The Republican Party was compelled to champion “winner-take-all” in response; the main ideas for reform (district or proportional plans) were impossible. 1950 proportional plan was intended to enhance Southern power and block progress on civil rights legislation. 1960s, Electoral College viewed as essential to opposition to civil rights and voting rights; Racial politics has shaped the effort for reform.
Reed Hundt: 49:00-57:15
Presently, 2/3 of African American population is in the Old Confederacy. The Electoral College system means their votes have never counted for the candidate whom most prefer. The parties have now become defined by race and geography; the system encourages the racialization of all issues.
Session 2: The Electoral College: Harmful
James Glassman: 57:55-1:08:10
Narration of slides: effect on turnout; ignoring 80% of the population; ignoring Black voters, alienation and distrust, vulnerability to foreign interference; votes not counting equally, out of sync with national vote
Session 3: Thought Leaders
James Glassman: 1:11:25 – 1:17:25
Perspective of a Republican who supports national popular vote. After 2020, Republican Party will have lost popular vote in 7 of last 8 elections. Party is focusing on only a few states and tailoring messages to those states. Danger of becoming an increasingly extreme minority party. The popular vote is more inclusive. The US is a center-right nation; the party has nothing to fear from the national popular vote.
Jesse Wegman: 1:19 – 1:27:40 & 1:47:45-1:51:10
Reporting “almost consensus” views of numerous campaign managers, who make tough, hard political decisions. Managers see the Electoral College system up close, and they dislike it. It distorts our politics; it is corrosive. A national popular vote would change how candidates campaign for the better. It would increase turnout. It would favor moderation. It would assure legitimacy to the winner.
Answering an audience question; the Electoral College system does not assure stability/finality re the election outcome. In 2000 we knew the outcome of the national popular vote on election night; it took over a month to decide the electoral college vote.
Walter Mondale: 1:28-1:31:30 & 1:51:30 -1:53:45
People just reject the idea that, through some gimmick, the candidate who gets the most votes is not elected. The George Wallace campaign is a “haunting reality” to this day.
Jason Harrow: 1:31:45-1:36:50
There is real value to developing spaces where diverse persons can have open-minded dialogue about the Electoral College through which peoples’ minds can actually be changed. Equal Citizens is developing such an initiative for civic discourse: “Fix the College.”
Alexander Keyssar: 1:37:40-1:46:55
Major reform over the next few years is not out of the question; we “have a shot” at it. The Electoral College system reinforces the 2-party system, which is not necessarily a good thing. Reforms in the past have made the greatest progress when the party systems were in flux—1820s, 1960s-70s. One lesson from the past—1800-1804—is that reformers can transform into opponents of reform when they become politically dominant. One key may be for the Democratic Party to continue to support reform, whatever the result of the next few elections.
Reed Hundt: 1:54:30-2:00
This is a unique moment in history; reform may indeed be possible. There is an urgency to act soon as possible after the election..
Session 4: Voter Choice Ballot
Mark Bohnhorst: 2:02-2:10:20
Voter Choice Ballot is simple, has immediate effect, is flexible and is powerful. It is an example of a “state by state” approach (recommended by 3 law professors beginning in 2001) that can be implemented by “pairing.” For example, pairing Ohio (18 EVs) with Minnesota (10 EVs), New Mexico (5 EVs) and Delaware (3 EVs), would be politically neutral and commit 36 electoral votes to the winner of the national vote as of the next election.
Andrew Claster: 2:11:50-2:21:13
Reporting results of February 2020 National and Florida poll. By substantial majorities, respondents agreed the winner of the national vote should be elected president, understood the Voter Choice Ballot and found it was not confusing, and wanted to have the choice to vote for the winner of the national popular vote.
Reed Hundt: 2:21:30-2:25:15
We confront a crisis in democracy; we should not waste that crisis. If the Ballot existed in only one state –Ohio—the effect could be to force both major parties to compete nationally for every vote. [As Ohio goes, so goes the nation.] We should begin the conversations now to prepare ourselves to dive in right after the election and pull off all reforms as soon as possible—including Voter Choice Ballot and the Interstate Compact.
Jonathan Blake: 2:25:30-2:36:11
We should seize the current momentum for change and act a soon as possible. Reporting on conversations with 15 voter rights/democracy groups; all agree we are on a wave and need to keep building. All understood the idea behind the Ballot—many understood it intuitively without explanation—and understood that if only one or two states adopted the Ballot, it would make a real difference. All agree there should be a collaborative effort to start immediately after the election. There needs to be strong support from around the nation for the Colorado election.
Session 5: Interstate Compact
Dr. John Koza: 2:38:40-3:09:25 (Dialogue with Mark Bohnhorst, 3:02-3:09:25)
Described the progress of the Interstate Compact (839 legislative meetings already this year), anti-npv resolutions introduced in some states, and “secret elections bills,” especially in South Dakota. Reported on status of the Colorado referendum election—have raised $3.5 million of $10 million needed. Polls indicate a toss-up, slightly favorable to the Compact. A significant problem is that Republican support (as high as 70% prior to 2016) is now at 25%.
Re: post election landscape, if we lose the Colorado election, it will be a major set-back. If Trump is re-elected, there are no prospects that Republican support will increase beyond 25%. Yet there is no systematic argument that the Republican Party benefits from the Electoral College. All indications are that battleground states are trending blue and some red states are trending purple. The election is likely to give rise to multi-state, multi-week chaos, which will disprove any notion that the Electoral College brings about stability.
Dr. Koza does not support the Voter Choice Ballot (begins at 2:48:30). In his view, a red or blue state would never adopt it; to do so would be a form of ‘unilateral disarmament” that could only favor the other party. In contrast, the Compact is based on cooperative action among states. Dr. Koza’s view is that a battleground state would never adopt the Ballot because it would greatly diminish the value of the state’s votes. HIs view is that it is wishful thinking that adoption in even a battleground state would result in candidates switching to nation-centered campaigns; he believes campaigns would simply double down in the existing battleground states. Dr. Koza also maintains the Voter Choice Ballot would be confusingly similar to the Interstate Compact and would impede the ability to have the Interstate Compact adopted.
In the ensuing dialogue, Dr. Koza acknowledged that a pairing strategy could answer his first objection—that the Ballot would not be politically balanced if adopted in just one state. He maintained that his other objections still applied and that the Ballot would be confusingly similar to the Interstate Compact
Reed Hundt: 3:09:45-3:15:05
Following up on Dr. Koza’s comment about the post-election landscape, and on Prof. Keyssar’s observation about 1800-04, the political winds can shift suddenly. Perhaps after the 2020 election, it will be the Democratic Party that no longer sees a political advantage in Electoral College Reform. The popular will may be needed to push politicians to stay true to the reform agenda. Hundt noted with regret that Dr. Koza has not accepted any reform other than his own.
Concluding Remarks
Mark Bohnhorst: 3:16-3:20
Electoral College reform is a moral issue, not just a political issue. The story of 1968-1970 sparks moral outrage; it is not well known and needs to be told again and again. We hope the program materials regarding Race and the Electoral College will be helpful to those who are organizing the Colorado referendum election campaign.
Prof. Keyssar’s historical perspective prompts two thoughts. One, this has been an incredibly long slog, and certain heroes have emerged from the historical record. One is Senator Birch Bayh. Another is Dr. John Koza.
Two, history may throw up unique moments, never to be repeated, when the impossible might be achievable. We may be in one of those moments. We violently agree on so much. We should do everything we can to work together to seize the moment immediately following the 2020 election.