{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["http://morgangriffith.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398647", "Congressman Griffith's Weekly E-Newsletter 11.20.16", "2016-11-20", "2016", "2016-11", "Republican", "House", "VA", "Morgan Griffith", "G000568", "morgangriffith.house.gov", null, null, "legacy", "Reasons for the Electoral College\r\nEvery four years, American news is dominated by the presidential election.\u00a0 Pundits and analysts play up the drama, predict the outcome of the Electoral College, and endlessly analyze the results.\u00a0 \r\nDiscussions of this year\u2019s results are unavoidable.\u00a0 Since the Republican candidate won the election, yet lost the popular vote by less than one percent, speculation has started on the purpose of the Electoral College.\u00a0 Only five times in our nation\u2019s 228 year history of electing a President have the results of the Electoral College not aligned with the winner of the popular vote (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016.)\u00a0 Each time this has occurred, the losing party begins the complaints.\r\nThe Electoral College was designed by our Founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, to be sure the President was elected by a federation of \u201cStates\u201d and to maintain a balance of power between all of the \u201cStates.\u201d\r\nAt the Constitutional Convention, several methods of electing a President were considered.\u00a0 The Founders were constantly aware of the dangers of consolidated power, and had the incredible foresight to devise a system which distributed power.\u00a0 The Electoral College was created to balance state and federal powers, and most importantly provide a voice to all \u201cStates\u201d \u2013 not just the most populous.\u00a0 \r\nAt the time of the creation of our nation, the smaller states worried about the largest states of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts ruling over all the rest.\u00a0 Without the establishment of the Electoral College to prevent this outcome, the Union would have never been formed.\r\nEach \u201cState\u201d was allotted two electors, in addition to the number of members the state has in the House of Representatives (based on population.)\u00a0 Today, the electoral votes per state range from the smallest of 3 to the most for California at 55.\u00a0 To win the Presidency, a candidate must win a majority of 270 of 538 electoral votes.\u00a0 Therefore, even under the Electoral College, winning California gives a candidate just over twenty percent of the votes needed.\u00a0 To match those 55, the other candidate would need to win the votes of a substantial number of smaller states.\u00a0\r\nThis election, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by approximately 1.3 million votes, yet she won California by 3.4 million.\u00a0 If you take out that one state, Donald Trump won the popular vote.\r\nWith a simple popular vote, the megalopolis of the East Coast, combined with California, would control every election.\u00a0 This would completely disenfranchise the flyover states, and rural areas of our country, including the Ninth District.\u00a0 Presidential candidates would focus their entire campaigns in California, New York City, and a few other heavily populated coastal areas, with no regard for the farms, factories, and families who work to keep them operational living in between.\r\nSome feel even in our current system that the voice of rural citizens like those in the Ninth are left out, and have proposed electors allotted by a \u201cdistrict system.\u201d\u00a0 The Constitution states that electors are to be chosen \u201cin such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,\u201d maintaining the power for states to control their elector system.\u00a0 In 48 of the states, winner takes all, but in Maine and Nebraska, the \u201cdistrict system\u201d awards two votes to the statewide popular vote winner, and one electoral vote for the candidate that wins each Congressional District.\u00a0 \r\nIf the method was adopted in Virginia, this year our state would have likely given six votes to Clinton and seven to Trump, as opposed to all thirteen votes to Clinton.\r\nThe Founders understood the will of the people and the consent of the governed was critical.\u00a0 But they also understood that if a handful of states could always dominate the selection of the Presidency, then the other states would feel both disenfranchised and oppressed.\u00a0 These feelings would exacerbate the divisions which naturally occur between the regions and could erupt into serious divisions within this union of \u201cStates\u201d and threaten the existence of the Republic.\u00a0 Interestingly, the solution was the Electoral College, known to be written by Hamilton in Federalist Paper No. 68, to make sure even the smallest of states had a part in the selection of the President of this union of \u201cStates.\u201d\r\nThe Electoral College is there for an important purpose and has served our Republic well.\r\nIf you have questions, concerns, or comments, feel free to contact my office. \u00a0You can call my Abingdon office at 276-525-1405 or my Christiansburg office at 540-381-5671. \u00a0To reach my office via email, please visit my website at www.morgangriffith.house.gov. \u00a0Also on my website is the latest material from my office, including information on votes recently taken on the floor of the House of Representatives.\r\n###", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["http://morgangriffith.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398647"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.9609037078917027, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}