The Electoral College does not benefit small states

// Published April 18, 2007
Time and again, the National Popular Vote plan runs afoul of critics who think big cities will dominate direct presidential elections.

FairVote's director Rob Richie tackles that myth with a letter to the NY Times:

The current system does not benefit small-population states, however. While such states have fewer people per electoral vote than big states, there"s a reason for the conventional wisdom that the 2004 election came down to winning two of the big battlegrounds of Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.

A gain of 5,000 votes in New Mexico might help swing five electoral votes in your favor. But that exact same vote gain in Florida could swing 25 electoral votes. When weighing where to focus resources, campaigns gravitate to the big swing states.

Comment on The Electoral College does not benefit small states

Current Discussion

  • A person in a small state has no power if no candidate cares what they think or lifts a finger to secure their vote. That's the fundamental problem with the current Electoral College system -- one our founders would not have tolerated most states being irrelevant to presidential elections.

    Posted by Rob Richie, 07/19/2008 (2 years ago)

  • Saying the small states are disadvantaged is like saying a ton of dog food is more expensive than an ounce of caviar. It's true but it misses the point a little bit. When you have half a million people of course you have less political power than a state of 20 million, but a single person in a small state has nearly 4 times as much voting power.

    Posted by Yuckybear, 07/18/2008 (2 years ago)

  • The small states are indeed the most disadvantaged of all under the current system of electing the President. Political clout comes from being a closely divided battleground state, not the two-vote bonus in the Electoral College. Small states are almost invariably non-competitive in presidential election. Of the 13 smallest states, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Alaska regularly vote Republican, and Rhode Island, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont, Maine, and DC regularly vote Democratic. These 12 states together contain 11 million people. Because of the two electoral-vote bonus that each state receives, the 12 non-competitive small states have 40 electoral votes. However, the two-vote bonus is an entirely illusory advantage to the small states. Ohio has 11 million people and has ???only??? 20 electoral votes. As we all know, the 11 million people in Ohio are the center of attention in presidential campaigns, while the 11 million people in the 12 non-competitive small states are utterly irrelevant. Nationwide election of the President would make each of the voters in the 12 smallest states as important as an Ohio voter.

    Posted by reed, 04/19/2007 (3 years ago)