Winner Take All: How the General Ticket System Awards the Electoral Vote in Most States
While the Constitution is silent on the exact procedure for awarding each state’s electoral votes, 48 states and the District of Columbia currently use the “general ticket” or “winner-take-all” system. The sole exceptions to this practice, Maine and Nebraska, use the “district” system, which is examined later in this report. Under the general ticket system, each political party or group or independent candidacy that is eligible to be placed on the ballot nominates a group (also known as “ticket” or “slate”) of candidates for the office of elector equal in number to the state’s total number of electors. As noted previously, voters then cast a single vote for the presidential and vice presidential candidates of their choice; when they do so, they actually cast a vote for the entire ticket of electors pledged to the candidates of their choice. The ticket receiving the most votes statewide (a plurality is sufficient) is elected. These people become the electors for that state.
As an illustration, this is how the general ticket system works in a hypothetical state, “State A.” Assume that State A currently has 10 electoral votes, reflecting its two Senators and eight Representatives. The two equally hypothetical major parties, “Party X” and “Party Y” each nominate 10 persons for the office of presidential elector, pledged to the presidential and vice presidential candidates of their party. Voters go to the polls and cast a single vote for the ticket of party electors of their choice, although as noted previously, only the names of the presidential and vice presidential candidates are likely to appear on the ballot. Party X’s slate of elector-candidates receives 51% of the popular vote; Party Y’s slate receives 49%. Notwithstanding the closeness of the results, all 10 of Party X’s electors are chosen, and Party Y wins no electoral votes in the state.
The Party X electors are pledged to their party’s presidential and vice presidential candidates, and they normally vote to confirm the choice of the citizens who elected them (the exception, as noted previously, would be the infrequent faithless elector). The general ticket system has been favored since the 19th century, as it tends to magnify the winning candidates’ victory margin within states and across the nation, and generally guarantees a national electoral college majority for the winners. It has, however, been criticized on the grounds that it effectively negates the votes for the runners-up.
Returning to State A, some critics suggest that it would be more equitable, given the state of the popular vote, if a number of electors supporting Party Y’s candidate were chosen. Alternative methods of allocating electors are examined in a later section of this report, under ““Mend It” ― Reforming the Electoral College.”*
Note: For further information on contemporary proposals to reform or eliminate the electoral college, please consult CRS Report R42139, Contemporary Developments in Presidential Elections, by Kevin J. Coleman, R. Sam Garrett, and Thomas H. Neale.
Photograph: Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA, 2011
*“Mend It” ― Reforming the Electoral College
Two alternative methods for awarding electoral votes that pass the test of constitutionality have long been available to the states, the district and proportional plans. They have historically been promoted as avoiding the alleged failings of the general ticket system, and, according to their advocates, they have an added virtue in that they would not require a constitutional amendment. A third reform option, the automatic plan, would, however, require a constitutional amendment.
Read the entire report: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/199934.pdf
Pages: 1 · 2
More Articles
- How The Health Law Might Be Changed By The Next President
- ThinkProgress: Romney Campaign Incorrectly Trains Iowa Poll Watchers To Check For Photo ID
- Voting Lessons from Kindergarten: When candidates are Big Bird, The Cat in the Hat, Winnie the Pooh and Olivia
- Culture and Political Watch, The Spirit of Compromise: Why Governing Demands It and Campaigning Undermines It
- The Real Women Behind the 'Binders': MassGAP
- Eleanor Roosevelt's Fight for Labor Rights Lives On
- If You Think You'd Miss Big Bird, How About Downton Abbey, Mystery!, Antiques Roadshow and The Nutcracker? NPR? PRI?
- The Debates: Are the Candidates 'Artfully Dodging"?
- Sequestration: “A self-inflicted wound” to a struggling economy
- Winslow Homer and His Maine Studio: “Look at nature, work independently, and solve your own problems”
