Kelly 1
Neil Kelly
Professor Godbey
ENGL 1302
April 22, 2022
An Annotated Bibliography
Of
Untitled ENGL 1302 Essay
In recent presidential elections, some have criticized the Electoral College for not
adequately representing every American citizen in an equal manner. However, to properly
critique this system, it is imperative to understand how this system works and why it was
implemented. One side argues that the Electoral College gives more power to some citizens than
others. The other side believes that this system is working as intended and should remain. While
a presidential candidate can receive more total votes, they can still be beat out because of the
Electoral College. This was a major discussion point following the 2016 presidential election,
where Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton received sixty-six million votes, but Republican
nominee Donald Trump only received sixty-three million votes. In the current procedure, the
total votes (popular vote) do not mean anything; the Electoral votes are all that matter. Knowing
this, it is possible to see why this system would be debated.
When an American votes, they nominate an individual called an elector to represent him
or her. Electors usually state who they will vote for if they are nominated. The Electoral College
is composed of 538 electors who directly vote on who should become president. There are no
federal laws that state that an elector has to vote for who they said they would, but the vast
majority of electors have been faithful to his or her stance. As was previously mentioned,
Kelly 2
popular vote (each American gets one vote for his or her candidate) does not mean anything. The
only votes that matter are the electoral votes. These electoral votes are winner-takes-all. For
example, if Texas has twenty Republican electors and eighteen Democrat electors, then the
Republican candidate will receive all thirty-eight electoral votes. Some states are almost
guaranteed votes, such as how California almost always supports Democrat candidates, whereas
Texas almost always supports Republican candidates. However, there are a few states that hold
quite a number of electoral votes, but are not solidly one or the other. These states, being highly
contested each election cycle, have earned the nickname “battleground states.”
One side of this argument believes that with the Electoral College, states with lesser
populations will still have a say in the presidential election. There are beliefs that what works
best for some states may not work for other states. One of the main reasons for having the
Electoral College in the first place is to ensure that no handful of densely-populated states in a
small region could dictate who should lead the country. While it appears less “democratic” than a
direct democracy, it helps to give the smaller voices a larger impact.
The other side believes that the Electoral College takes away from a single American’s
voice in presidential elections. Since each state is guaranteed at least three electoral votes, and
there are a total of 538 electoral votes for all fifty states, states will lose votes and gain votes as
state populations fluctuate. There is also evidence to support that with the Electoral College, socalled “battleground states'' are the main focus of presidential candidates and that other states are
largely ignored.
Kelly 3
The following sources give more in-depth information regarding how the Electoral
College. This includes a deeper dive into the College’s specific protocols and its origins.
“How the Electoral College System Works.” Supreme Court Debates, vol. 69, no. 1, Jan. 2017,
pp. 2–5. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=f6h&AN=121027999&site=ehost-live
This article discusses the constitutional origins of the Electoral College from the
Constitutional Convention of 1787, in which a number of options were heavily debated, but
ultimately late in the convention, under the Committee of Eleven on Postponed Matters, the
design was implemented and widely accepted, as a successful compromise. Under the Original
Constitutional System, each state was allocated electors based on the combined total of both
House of Representative and Senate members. In 1800, the Twelfth Amendment modified the
original design slightly by grouping the President and Vice President of each party (joint ticket)
instead of ranking the highest balloted candidate President and the second highest as Vice
President. Modern day electors generally include popular State and locally elected officials,
activists, and “ordinary” citizens. General elections were chosen to be in November, and the
electors were required to meet “in their respective States” and usually in their respective State
capitals. Procedures on managing objections to votes as well as how a tie vote is handled are
specified.
Evaluation of source
“How the Electoral College Works: Who’s Really Voting for the President?” Congressional
Digest, vol. 99, no. 6, June 2020, pp. 3–4. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=a9h&AN=143165377&site=ehost-live
Kelly 4
This short and sweet document starts by giving a quick history of the system used to elect
Presidents of the United States in the span of only a few paragraphs. It then goes on to discuss
different ways a state can support a presidential candidate and the qualifications of an elector.
For a quick and simple overview of the whole process, as well as a brief history, this
source is quite good. It also brings up a few interesting details, such as how there have been more
amendment proposals to change the Electoral College than any other proposal drafted. Simply
put, this source is good for quick facts such as how votes are distributed among the states and
who is qualified to become an elector, but falls short of giving information that is not present in
other sources.
Kimberling, William C. “The electoral college”. Vol. 1. National Clearinghouse on Election
Administration, Federal Election Commission, 1992.
Kimberling gives a brief lesson on how the concept of the first Electoral College came to
be. He discusses other plans that could have been used to elect presidents, but were ultimately
turned down for one reason or another. He then goes on to describe how the original system was
used, an issue was uncovered, the Twelfth Amendment introduced, and how that essentially
brought about the second revision of the Electoral College. The next few pages talk about
notable instances where the Electoral College had a quirk or interesting effect on the presidential
election. Afterward, the author describes how the system works today, followed by how, when,
and how many Electors are elected to the College. He tells how votes are collected from each
Elector and how they are counted. The final section brings up arguments that could be made in
favor or opposition of the Electoral College.
This source is both well written and well thought out. It was published by William
Kimberling, who appears to have been on the federal Election Commission. He brought up
reasons why other forms of elections, such as direct vote or popular vote would not work and
Kelly 5
why we have the Electoral College today. The evolution of the College over time, as well as
cases where the system showed some weak points that needed reinforcement. There is not a lot
of political jargon in here to confuse readers; this document was written in such a way that it
conveyed good information while being easy to understand at the same time.
Longley, Lawrence D. “The Electoral College.” Current History, vol. 67, no. 396, 1974, pp.
64–86, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45313111. Accessed 24 Apr. 2022.
This article presents a brief history on the design and inception of the Electoral College,
including the options considered prior to the final compromise resulting in its adoption. Initially,
the point the Constitutional Convention considered was a compromise between the principles of
population and state interests. The assumption was that the House contingency election
procedure would be utilized. However, after 1824, the balance the Founding Fathers envisioned
was destroyed in favor of a distorted representation of the population. The current Electoral
College may result in a suppression of non-regionally based third parties. The accepted
characteristics of the Electoral College design, good or bad, are comprised of: (1) the faithless
elector – ones who are unwise, unlearned, or unscrupulous; (2) unit rule – a state granting all
votes to the popular vote winner plurality, possibly leading to hugely magnifying the voters in
larger states; (3) two electoral votes (one for the Representative and one for the Senator) per
state, but this is largely outweighed by the unit rule; (4) the contingency election procedure for
deadlock – if a tie occurs, the decision is granted to the House of Representatives; and (5) the
winner of the popular vote may not win the election – this has occurred in several elections
historically, and four reform plans are in place to address the accepted procedures.
Because this article is from 1974, it is a bit harder to follow than other sources. However,
what it brings to the discussion is a good amount of information on what would happen in edge
cases; things that could theoretically occur, but would be extremely rare. In addition, it mentions
Kelly 6
that it could be argued that the Electoral College encourages the existence of political parties due
to the “winner-take-all” ideology it follows. As this source is published in a university’s journal
from a Government professor, it is reasonable to assume that the author has the credibility and
knowledge to be relied on. However, this is one of the oldest sources present, so some of the
information in the article may be outdated.
Villegas, Christina. “Electing the People’s President: The Popular Origins of the Electoral
College.” Perspectives on Political Science, vol. 47, no. 4, Oct. 2018, pp. 201–09.
EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.library.collin.edu/10.1080/10457097.2016.1254492
Christina describes how the Electoral College is often misunderstood by most voters,
who believe the system is outdated and undemocratic. She then describes how the Electoral
College was designed to be fair to all states, not just the states with the largest population. She
goes into extreme detail and shows specific examples of other scholars and some historical
accounts of individuals describing how the system should work, why it would work, and how
potential flaws were addressed.
This source only focuses on a couple aspects of the Electoral College. It does not address
how the system evolved in the long run over the centuries. In addition to this, the language used
in this source is a little more complex than that of other articles, which means that this article is
trickier to follow for the novice reader. However, the information provided here is top-notch.
The author demonstrates how other historical documents caused or influenced the creation of the
Electoral College, such as Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Papers or the Virginia and New
Jersey Plans. The author herself worked in California State University’s Political Science
department, so while she has not published a lot of articles, she has the knowledge to back up
what she has written.
Kelly 7
The following sources are in favor of the Electoral College. These articles argue that the
Electoral College benefits smaller states by ensuring that smaller states are guaranteed at least
three of the electoral votes. This prevents a few large states from deciding the president for all
fifty states.
Byas, Steve. “The Creation and History of the Electoral College: The Creation of the Electoral
College Was to Take Partisanship out of the Process of Electing the President so That the
Best Man Got the Job, and It’s Still Important.” New American (08856540), vol. 37, no.
1, Jan. 2021, pp. 33–37. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=f6h&AN=147760464&site=ehost-live
This article provides the background of the Electoral College and the effort to remove
partisanship from resulting in the ultimate selection of the President. While a multitude of
options were presented during the Constitutional Convention strong disagreements were had, the
final concept and compromise of the Electoral College was ultimately navigated. The temporary
body of the electors was less likely to be affected by foreign influences between elections and
there would be limited corruption to the process. The concept of the popular vote determining the
President was determined to be impractical and inconsistent with the federal system of
governance the Founding Fathers were creating. Debate between the Federalists and Republicans
flared, but ultimately the Electoral College was proved to be highly worthy in its ability to
discourage regionalism. Alexander Hamilton, through the Federalist Papers, made clear the
layout that is largely in place today, summing up the design in that the “Electoral College is not
without its faults, as is the case with all human creations.”
Long title aside, the article spends most of its time recounting the history of the Electoral
College in a very long, yet still concise format. The sentences are easy to follow, there were
photos and diagrams that help convey the points being made, and the author connects ideas to
Kelly 8
one another. Because of this, when the reader gets to the last section and the author makes his
position clear that the Electoral College is good, the reader is inclined to agree. The author has
experience teaching history and Constitutional Law, and has authored a government textbook.
With this kind of background, it is safe to call the author a credible source. Overall, a very solid
source.
Gaughan, Anthony J. “The Small Margins Problem: How Abolishing the Electoral
College Could Create a Future Election Crisis.” Idaho Law Review, vol. 56, no. 2, May
2020, pp. 183–91. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=lgh&AN=150051113&site=ehost-live
This article considers the results of the dissolution of the Electoral College in an election
that is very close in popular votes. With the Electoral College in place, the finest count of the
vote (the precise margin of victory) is rendered largely unimportant by most states, as they grant
their Electoral College votes to the candidate receiving the most votes; however, only a few
“swing” states determine the winner nation-wide. This is a simpler approach in the final
determination that was a national popular vote in existence, in which the final count of all 50
states’ votes would be critical. With election fraud concerns being voiced daily, managing to get
to a final verdict could take weeks or more, as recently demonstrated by lagging results even
with increased technology.
Right off the bat, the author has some impressive credentials. Ph.D in history and a law
professor at a few colleges. While the document is thoroughly researched, there may be too
many references for some readers. The author argues that because the Electoral College does not
need to keep track of every single vote, the winner-take-all ideology that the College uses is a lot
easier to manage. The author furthers his point by mentioning cases where only a few thousand
miscounted ballots could have cost a politician the race, and argue that a miscount or recount on
Kelly 9
the scale of a whole country would be extremely time consuming and controversial. This article
is incredibly well written and has valid points with sources to prove it. This source is perfect for
nearly everyone.
Hardaway, Robert M. Saving the Electoral College: Why the National Popular Vote Would
Undermine Democracy. Praeger, 2019. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=nlebk&AN=2221693&site=ehost-live
The Electoral College has been under fire since its creation, largely by the U.S.
Government internally, specifically the U.S. Congress. However, in more recent times, the push
to dissolution is coming from a private entity in California entitled “National Popular Vote”
(NPV). The NPV is attempting to avoid amending the U.S. Constitution design. The media is
key in the process. The plan entails states who have a majority of electoral votes and adopt the
NPV discounting their popular votes relinquishing those votes to the media-declared winner. The
concern is that the popular votes of people in their respective states are ignored and people will
be vastly more underrepresented, and thereby discontented, than with the current Electoral
College in place.
If a reader is looking for a quick and easy read, this source is not it. This is not an article,
but rather a full book. The author has written several books over various political and economic
topics in America. In addition to authoring so many books, he has also held many law related
jobs, such as a law professor, a deputy district attorney, and attorney just to name a few. He
discusses a large number of reasons why the Electoral College is better than any alternative and
has plenty of references to support each of his claims. This is a very good source.
“Should the Current Electoral College System Be Preserved? PRO.” Congressional Digest, vol.
80, no. 1, Jan. 2001, p. 16. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=f6h&AN=4100525&site=ehost-live
Kelly 10
As early as 1888, an election in which the popular vote did not result in an Electoral
College-determined winner occurred, and the same has occurred in several elections since. Since
a minority is concentrated within particular states and not distributed evenly throughout the U.S.,
they would be outvoted in a country-wide popular vote (no Electoral College). As civil rights
leaders understood early on, the flawed formula of the greatest good for the greatest number does
not work. If states are in the minority, those states in the majority will overcome them and ease
them out of any decision-making formula. The Founding Fathers’ design promoted free
institutions from populism (which is equivalent to the popular majority vote). Electing a
President shouldn’t be solely about the input from the voter side but also about the output of an
electoral system including the caliber of person placed in office and the effects thereof.
Ross, Tara. Why We Need the Electoral College. Regnery Gateway, 2017. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=nlebk&AN=1701595&site=ehost-live
Contrary to recent pronouncements by members of our citizenry in the media, and often
those perhaps uneducated in what the Electoral College actually is, the Electoral College is
neither a flaw nor an obstacle to Constitutionality and democracy. In fact, it supports multiple
achievements including: (1) preventing political crises following close elections, (2) not favoring
one political party over another, and (3) promoting states, not a centralized government, as the
force behind elections, and how that diminishes political divisiveness. The Founding Fathers
deemed the Electoral College vital to the Constitution. While the subject is raised every
Presidential election cycle, the point stands that the Electoral College is still the best option.
Kelly 11
The following sources are against the Electoral College. These articles argue that the
Electoral College is outdated, dysfunctional, and/or undemocratic. These articles either propose
just scrapping everything or scrapping and proposing a replacement system.
Electoral College.” Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia, Jan. 2018, p. 1; EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=funk&AN=el023400&site=ehost-live
The original design of the Electoral College, as specified by the drafters of the
Constitution, resulted in a few issues. While the plan was to elect leaders unaffiliated along
partisan lines and politics, getting to that point was problematic, as in the case of the election of
1800 between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr. At the time, the candidate for President with
the most votes from the Electoral College was declared the President and the candidate with the
second most votes was declared the Vice President. The electors voted along party lines, and the
result was a tie. A struggle ensued when the decision was passed to the U.S. House of
Representatives and 36 ballots were cast prior to Jefferson being declared President. The lesson
was learned, and in 1804, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution was implemented. Another
failed instance of the Electoral College design occurred in 1877, wherein Congress could not
come to an agreement. It took ten more years for Congress to enact a law granting states power
to resolve their controversies within. Finally, the 23rd Amendment, adopted in 1961, brought
subtle changes to the District of Columbia to vote for three electors, given its size.
Kazin, Michael. “The Creaky Old System.” Nation, vol. 311, no. 7, Oct. 2020, pp. 42–44.
EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=a9h&AN=145912742&site=ehost-live
This article points out that 270 Electors, in just a state or two, and whose names are
largely a mystery to the public, decide the Presidency. While they have been instructed to abide
by their party’s nominee, the question remains as to whether they can be trusted. The original
Kelly 12
design of the Electoral College was a poor compromise between those Founding Fathers who
thought the office should be chosen by Congress and those who thought it should be chosen by
state governments. Enacting very large modifications to or full abolishment of the Electoral
College has been debated for the last 200 years, and, since the 1940s to today, the majority of the
population have favored the idea of a popular vote. The Electoral College has been a recurring
point of contention and has defied the popular will. The difference of several thousand votes in a
state or two can result in a different President.
Nichols, John. “Mr. President, We Have Some Bad News and Some Good News... The BAD
News Is You LOST! The GOOD News Is You WON!” Nation, vol. 310, no. 3, Feb.
2020, pp. 16–19. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=f6h&AN=141227994&site=ehost-live
This article argues that the Electoral College favors Republicans and gives more power to
smaller states. In 2019, a University of Texas study cites “inversions” occurring when the
Presidential candidate who won the popular vote manages to lose upon the Electoral College
making their determination. The National Popular Vote is an excellent solution to the Electoral
College; is endorsed by the League of Women Voters, the NAACP, Common Cause, etc.; and is
gaining a few states every year to join the effort to institute a national popular vote. The Electoral
College, designed by slaveholding Framers, is an abomination designed to overturn majority
votes and has long since been outdated. Winning the Presidency in 2020 by popular vote is not
enough; the Electoral College must be won in the battleground/swing states.
Schultz, David. “Voting Rights and the Unconstitutionality of the Electoral College
Winner-Take-All Allocation.” South Dakota Law Review, vol. 66, no. 3, Nov. 2021, pp.
457–72. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=lgh&AN=153920885&site=ehost-live
Kelly 13
The Constitution and the 12th Amendment dictate that the President is chosen not by
popular vote, but by a team of 270 largely unknown, unelected people. In 48 of the 50 states, the
popular vote winner is granted all the electoral votes. This winner-take-all practice, combined
with the vastly vying political party arguments and the virtually absent swing voter, results in
elections that don’t work and make many voters' wishes and partisan inclinations disappear. The
Electoral College state allocation voting process is unconstitutional and a violation of the Equal
Protection and Due Process clauses.
Despite being written in late 2021, the article still reads as though it was published in the
nineteenth century because of some weird phrasing and the odd yellow color of the paper. There
are also a lot of footnotes, which is distracting to the reader. However, the author is a college
professor with a background in political science and legal studies, so the author is credible. This
is a good source for specific examples and claims, but the readability is less than ideal.
Wilmore, Kathy, and Rebecca Zissou. “Should We Get Rid of the Electoral College?
Many People Say the Electoral College Ignores the Millions of Voters Who Don’t Live in
Swing States. Is It Time to Elect the President by Popular Vote Instead?” Junior
Scholastic, vol. 123, no. 3, Nov. 2020, pp. 30–31. EBSCOhost,
http://library.collin.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=f6h&AN=146687045&site=ehost-live
The article begins with the author calling into question the Electoral College. They argue
that because other government officials are elected through popular vote, why should the
President be any different? They next bring up swing states, wherein they state that with popular
vote, the presidential candidate would have to focus on every state and not assume that a given
state is a freebie. The next two paragraphs very lightly touch on other pros and cons of the
discussion, then the article closes with a graphic showing how some candidates lost the popular
vote, yet won the presidential race.
Kelly 14
This source is likely underwhelming and uninteresting for most readers. There is little to
no new information or points in this article that has not been stated in another source. However,
this is because this article was likely directed towards a much younger audience as it was
published in Junior Scholastic. What this article has that others do not is ease of understanding
because it lacks pages upon pages of historical references, quotes from other historical journals,
and other pieces of information that would bore young minds. Overall, not a great article for
most readers who are looking for dates, number