The Electoral College, Jenga, and Tyranny of the Majority

November 26th, 2016

Jenga should be a required discipline of political scientists; the game teaches, among other things, the consequences of haste. A game of wooden blocks and balance, it teaches the “simple” reality of balance and center of gravity; it also teaches the danger of haste; if a player acts too quickly, either in removing a block or in placing it on top of the stack, the whole mess comes down.

So? Let’s begin with recent statements by certain mayors that they will oppose federal enforcement of immigration law, pronouncing their cities to be ‘sanctuary cities.’

There’s a “minor” problem: cities aren’t sovereign entities. Cities are constructs (physical and otherwise) that exist purely within the definition of respective state laws. If the state legislature changes the relevant laws, the city will change accordingly. For example, the city of South Norfolk and Norfolk County were merged into the city of Chesapeake by the Virginia Assembly in 1963; South Norfolk ceased to exist by an act of the state.

Thus, the idea of sanctuary cities is, from a legal perspective, specious. One might argue for sanctuary states, forcing a discussion on state versus federal sovereignty, but the idea of city sovereignty simply doesn’t exist in any meaningful context.

At the same time, we’re seeing an interesting argument - by those sympathetic to sanctuary cities – for the abolishment of the Electoral College. (We’ll skip the point that one political party has for years reveled in the fact that the electoral college gives them a leg up on any Presidential election).

If you argue for “sanctuary” (sanctuary states to protect various cities) and resisting the federal government, then you’re really arguing for states’ rights. And if you argue for states’ rights, and sanctuary states (and cities), you need to support the Electoral College. The “Why” is the reason the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College in the first place.

The Electoral College, (described in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, and as amended in the 12^th, 20^th and 23^rd Amendments) provides for an electoral count that is equal to the number of Congressmen and Senators from each state (plus three for Washington DC).

The Constitution’s “user’s manual,” the Federalist Papers, discusses why selection of the President must reflect the states’ presence; in a nutshell, the answer is this: the electoral college was designed to reflect (and guarantee) state sovereignty: the Constitution (and all amendments) – the document that forms the nation and our national government – was not and is not something approved or changed by popular vote, it was approved by consensus of the majority of the states. Stated otherwise, the states have sovereignty and the states created this nation.

Why this particular construct? The answer is simple: fear of centralization of power and tyranny of the majority. Under the Constitution power is decentralized and, as importantly, difficult to utilize. This is to prevent anyone – a president, a specific Congress, or a court – from gathering too much power, or from acting precipitously. If you bemoan the election of Mr. Trump, you should take heart in this. But, eliminating the Electoral College would eliminate the state’s role in the selection process of the president and more importantly, represent the effective first (and major) step in eliminating states as sovereign entities.

And here’s the so what. Eliminate the Electoral College and presidential elections would focus on 6 or 7 states – those states with the largest populations. The rest of the states? No one would care. Think we have a problem right now between the coasts and the rest of the country? Imagine that magnified by 2 or 3 times.

Eliminate the Electoral College and you end the current process amending the Constitution. You effectively substitute simple majority rule for what we now have. Do that and you seriously undermine the Bill of Rights – which protects minority – not majority – rights.

Eliminate the electoral college, and undermine state sovereignty, and you effectively end the current allocation process for Congress. People in Wyoming? Why do they need a Congressman and two Senators?

And that’s the start: State Sovereignty, Congressional representation, Minority Rights. Is that what we really want?

Haste: in Jenga, the consequence of acting too quickly is that everything comes tumbling down. Our Founding Fathers understood that risk. We should remember that. Go ahead, pull that block out of the stack…