Why Does America Have an Electoral College? | America's Written Constitution

Welcome back. This lecture continues our conversation about article two of the constitution uh which focuses on America's presidency. It corresponds to chapter 4 of the book America's constitution, a biography which is our our guide book for this walking tour through the written constitution. Uh in our last session we talked about how the presidency is vastly more powerful than anything that existed under the articles of confederation at the federal level and frankly also vastly more powerful than anything that existed in the 13 states. Uh most state governments pick their chief executive by the legislature. But in America the presidency is going to have an independent base of power. He's not picked by the legislature. In 10 of the 13 states, the governor has a one-year term. This president is going to have a 4year term. He's going to be per most states don't allow or many states don't allow perpetual reelability. This president is going to be perpetually reeligible. Only one of the 13 states, uh, New York, has a multi-year term and perpetual reel. It's that's a three-year term for their governorship. the presidency is going to be even more powerful at four. Only one of the states, Massachusetts, gives the governor um and the governor alone a veto pen. The the constitution is going to give the president a veto pen. And and so it's going to combine in certain ways the the elements of the two strongest state governorships, the New York governorship, um three-year term perpetual reelability, the Massachusetts governorship, a pardon, a veto pen in his own hand, and it's going to add all sorts of of additional uh uh executive powers to to this um supremely powerful new office that's being created. an office to repeat vastly more powerful than any state governor yet much more constrained than an English monarch. Um, and we'll talk about those constraints as as well. Let's talk um just a bit about what the rules are for who can become president. So, let's start with the property qualifications. That's right. None. Zero. That's an important number. We've been talking about numbers. zero are the property qualifications to be president. Person can be elected president even if um he's not eligible to be state governor. And indeed every state that has a governorship, Pennsylvania has a kind of a rotating executive council. But every state that has a single person as governor has considerable property qualifications for that office. Um of course in England to be the the chief executive you have to be basically the wealthiest person in England, the monarch. but zero property qualifications for the presidency. A radically democratic vision. Um let's talk about religious qualifications. In England, you need to be the head of the state, the defender of the faith. In America, there are no religious qualifications for the presidency. And indeed, a later provision, the constitution says that in article six, there will be no religious tests for any federal office. This too, it's a dramatic contrast not just with the rules in England at the time, but in the 13 states. um uh o only one state basically um has gotten rid of all religious qualifications. That's Virginia. In the vast number of of state constitutions, religious um qualifications, religious tests are not just um permitted, they are built into the state constitution itself in about 10 of the states. So um remarkable openness to talent. Now um uh the people will get to decide um uh uh whom they choose whom they have the most confidence in. No property qualifications, no religious qualifications. Now there is that thought that you have that rule in article 2 that a president must be a naturalb born citizen which means that he has to be a citizen on at the day of his birth. He could have been born abroad. John McCain, for example, was born in the Panama Canal zone. Mitt Romney's father, George Romney, who ran for president, was born in Mexico. But they were citizens on the day of their birth and therefore eligible. And you might think, well, that's kind of um uh a real restriction on on democracy. Um but in fact um and and and it may reflect some anti-immigrant sentiment, but let's remember some things. First of all, everyone who was already American citizen, whether foreign born or not at the time of the constitution, was eligible to be president. Alexander Hamilton was born outside the United States, not born, you know, in effect a citizen of the United States, but he was eligible to be president. Uh James Wilson, we talked about him from Scotland, um born in Scotland, he's eligibly president. Anyone who's proved their loyalty to the American system by being here in the American Revolution is eligible. They grandfather all those folks in um and and on far from being anti-immigrant, they're very pro-immigrant. Seven of the 39 people who draft the Constitution at Philadelphia are foreignborn. Vast numbers of foreignb born people participate in the act of ordainment and establishment um that results in the constitution. Um, a third of the early Supreme Court justices are foreignb born, including James Wilson. Four of the first six secretaries of the Treasury, including Alexander Hamilton and Albert Gallatin are foreignb born. Roughly a tenth of the first Congress is foreign born. And remember, if you're a naturalized American um who comes um later to the United States after being um born under some other flag, you are eligible to be in the House and the Senate and the and the Judiciary. That's not true in England. In England, foreignb born people are basically perpetually um ineligible to be a member of House of Commons or House of Lords or privy council or hold any um important um uh position of honor, trust and profit. But America's constitution is open to a very broad range of immigrants in part for national security reasons. We want folks to come, talented people, um the framers did, to come from abroad and add um their strength to the the American project to add um their skills and their talents, their um their military capacity. Um we want them to come here, buy Western land, and um and help us in the next war, which we hope doesn't happen, but we fear might. And so, it's quite actually a pro-immigration document. Um so, why this special rule about the presidency? And I think the idea was ultimately um it was a democratic idea in part. They were concerned that a foreign earl or duke might come over with a boatload of gold and buy a presidential election because there weren't campaign finance rules in place. They associated foreignb born um chiefs of state with monarchy. George the first was born outside of England. George II was born outside of England. Neither of them spoke English. So Americans tended to associate foreignb born heads of state with monarchy and aristocracy. And so they were worried that maybe some foreign aristocrat um uh the second or third son of George III or someone like that, the bishop of Osnberg was going to come over with a huge posi, a retinue of people, a boatload of gold and try to buy himself an election. So, so they created a specific rule and grandfathered in all the loyal Americans whether foreignb born or Americanborn who were here during the American Revolution, the Alexander Hamiltons of the world, the um James Wilsons of the world. Um so um so we've talked about uh no property qualifications. We've talked about no religious qualifications. The naturalb born citizen requirement is actually an egalitarian idea, an anti-aristocracy, anti- monarchy idea. What about this idea that a president has to be 35? Isn't that a restriction on the people's ability to choose the most virtuous person? Isn't that anti-democratic? Well, not quite because the spirit there was actually pro- egalitarian who could get themselves elected president the age of 33. What kind of person would have the name recognition to do that? Now, note that they're not thinking of any specific individual. This wasn't an effort to try to keep Alexander Hamilton out of the presidency immediately because he's only 33. Everyone understands to repeat that George Washington is going to be our first president if Virginia says yes. and he's going to continue to be present as long as he's willing to to serve. So, so it's not trying to exclude anyone who's currently 31 or 32 when the Constitution is is being uh considered, but there is a concern more generally about a certain kind of person, a famous son of a famous father. That's the kind of person who could get himself elected president um possibly at the age of of 30 or 32 or or 33. Um who is the prime minister of England when they're coming up with this rule these rules? And the answer is William Pit the Younger whose daddy was prime minister, William Pit the Elder. And the colonist liked his daddy. Pittsburgh is named after William Pit the Elder. But William Pit the Younger becomes a member of Parliament at age 21 and prime minister at age 24. And he might be good and he might be bad, but he's getting it because of his daddy's name. And American America's Constitution is trying to actually prevent that. Before you can be elected president, you should actually have a track record of your own. Um, so at 35, we'll know who you are. You can have held other offices. You can have been in the House or the Senate or State Government or something else. you'll have a chance to show your stuff and be judged by your own merits. It's an anti-dynastic idea. And indeed, George Washington is picked as first president in important respects for anti-dynastic reasons. George Washington becomes father of his country because he's not father of his own children. Um, and this is very well known. But Washington himself says in a in an early version of his first inaugural address, an early draft, and he cut this out because he was advised by Madison that it was a little too personal. Here's what George Washington writes in effect. Um and and what he's saying um uh well, let me actually first read you the quote and then I'll sort of um translate. divine providence. The good Lord has seen has not seen fit that my blood, this is Washington speaking, should be transmitted, or my name perpetuated by the endearing, though sometimes seducing channel of immediate offspring. I have no child for whom I could wish to make a provision, no family to build in greatness on my country's ruins, no earthly consideration beyond the hope of rendering some little service to our parent country could have persuaded me to accept this appointment. That's what he says in his first draft of his first inaugural address. In other words, trust me, I'm not going to try to create a throne because I've got no one to give it to. There is no George II um um to to give um uh uh uh uh power to um and indeed of the early presidents you see um Thomas Jefferson, George Washington has no sons. Thomas Jefferson has no sons, at least legitimate ones that we know about who bear his name and no little Tommy. Um James Madison has no sons. James Monroe has no sons. Now, John Adams, you see, has a son, and his name is Q, as in W. And his son does become president, but only well after he's 35 years old. He has a track record of his own. John Quincy Adams does. Distinguished scholar, diplomat, senator, secretary of state. When John Adams leaves office, little John Q is not even old enough um yet to to be eligible in his own right. Um uh I'll tell you one other a couple of other sort of stories um about their their obsession their concern with dynasty. Remember these guys who framed the constitution are were born American colonists. They were breaking away from England. In England power descends is transmitted dynastically you know from father to son or father to daughter Henry VIII to Elizabeth. Um and and they're trying to break with that. They've seen how um even in the House of Commons so-called power is transmitting dynastically from William Pith the Elder to William Pit the Younger and they're trying to to to break um um um with that. Um and they pick Washington in part because he is a break with dynast dynasty. You can trust him because he's got no son uh to give a throne to. um in the election between Thomas Jefferson and and John Adams. Why why do people think oh Jefferson's the Democrat, John Adams is a monarchist, John Adams is a farmer's son? Thomas Jefferson sits on a mountaintop lording over hundreds of slaves and yet he's the man of the people. Why is that? Well, Jefferson is actually very good at at political public relations. But but here's another thing. Um, I'll read you actually from um um uh campaign literature in the 1796 election. Uh here's a Boston newspaper. It warns that Adams, if elected, would work to install his well-born sons as lords of this country. Jefferson with daughters only can be trusted. Here's another um campaign sheet. Um um Adams has sons who might aim to succeed their father. Jefferson like Washington has no son. So all of that kind of concern, anxiety about dynasty is kind of packed into these these uh this very compact phrase 35 years. Um so it's actually quite a democratic as it's hugely powerful. the geostrategic um argument um that we've been talking about is embodying the presidency, creating a muscular presidency who's going to be able to stand up against kings and and emperors and zars around the world. Um uh um but it's also and that's one of our big themes, how geostrategic the constitution is, how focused it is on national security. But remember another theme is how democratic the document is. No property qualifications, no religious qualifications. this president's actually going to be elected in in in some ways um by the people. I'm going to talk about that in just a minute with the electoral college. Um and um anti-dynastic rules like the 35-year-old clause, anti-nobility rules, which is what the natural-born citizen idea is in its essence all about. We're going to pay him um this president so that um low uh so the people without vast amounts of wealth could be eligible to serve just as we're going to pay members of the the House of Representatives and and the Senate. Um, now what about the electoral college? You've been taught that they came up with an electoral college rather than direct election because they didn't believe in democracy. But I've just given you a bunch of evidence that they really were democrats at the founding. And they put the Constitution to a vote, we the people of the United States, an unprecedentedly inclusive vote. And they believe in direct election of governors. And they're actually creating a presidency that will be a model for direct election of governors. and they create a house of representatives that's directly elected in a way that wasn't true of the congress and the articles confederation. So I don't think it's actually fair to say oh they they created the electoral college because they really didn't believe in democracy because they they were afraid of of democratic um um uh power. So I don't think that's that actually explains the data. And you've been taught oh the electoral college is a balance between large states and small states. Well, the House and the Senate, that's a balance between populist states and less populous states, but not the electoral college. Electoral college, the big state guy wins every time. We've only had three small state presidents in all of American history. Bill Clinton, Franklin Pierce, and Zach Zachary Taylor. That's it. Remember, for the first uh the first president is from Virginia. That's the biggest state. And then actually Massachusetts is the next president. That's the second or third biggest state depending on your count. And then Virginia again, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe. For 32 of the first 36 years, it's Virginia, which is the biggest state. And for the other four, it's Massachusetts. And then for the next four, it's Massachusetts, which is the second or third biggest state, depending on you how you count. It's not a balance between big and small states. It's not because they didn't believe in democracy. Here's what James Carver would tell you. It's slavery, stupid. That's why we have an electoral college. In a world of direct election, the South loses every time because a huge proportion of its population is slave population. So obviously they don't vote. But in an electoral college system, the South gets to count its slaves, albeit at a discount, the three-fifths clause, but still gets to count its slaves. So the three-fifths clause is built in not just to the House of Representatives, but the electoral college as well. and it's going to end up with a presidency that ends up skewing very much in favor of of the South. Um, so who's the big winner in this electoral college world? It's Virginia. It's a large state that gets to count its slaves. Pennsylvania in 1800 has more uh uh free citizens than Virginia. Way more voters than Virginia in 1800. But Virginia has more electoral votes because Virginia gets to count as slaves as do all the southern states. Three-fifths. Our electoral college system is basically um very much part of the three-fifths compromise. Very much a proslavery accommodation in the Constitution. If the this wasn't crystal clear to every American uh when the constitution was being proposed, it soon became so with two elections between a southerner, Thomas Jefferson, and a northerner, John Adams, as soon as uh George Washington leaves the scene. And the South votes for the Southerner twice, Thomas Jefferson, and the North votes for the Northerner, John Adams, twice. New York is the swing state. first goes for Adams in 1796 and then for for Jefferson later on. We're going to talk a lot about that election in later lectures. But it was clear to all that basically this is the south against the north and the three-fifths clause is playing a huge part in in all of that as we're going to see in later chapters without three-fifths actually um John Adams wins even that second election. He loses against Jefferson in the rematch because Jefferson is benefiting from the extra three-fifths that the southern states are getting because three-fifths is built into the electoral college. So, we have the electoral college for reasons of slavery. We're going to come back to this again and again because one question is should we continue to have it if that's what it's all about. Now, I promised at the beginning of this session um about the presidency that you're going to be able to see all the great themes of article 2 uh in this painting 1796. It's the Washington family. Let me just identify what some of those themes are. Um and you see here. So, one the presidency it's it's a kind of a lonely office. Um the president here is not surrounded by other presidents. Remember in our previous chapter we saw Henry Clay and he's up there in in the Senate and there's John C. Calhoun and there's Daniel Webster. Congress is a collective body present one person and he's got his family all around him but there's not a a Congress of of presidents and no one's quite looking directly at him. It's a bit of a lonely office actually. Um so you see George Washington and what's he wearing? He's wearing his general's uniform. You see it's a geostrategic and military office. George Washington becomes the first president in part because he command partly because you can trust him and I'll tell you because of of he has no um uh heir to the throne who bears his name no George II and we're going to talk about that in a minute but partly because he had an army under his disposal um and gave it up. He was the only guy with an army on the continent during the civil during the revolutionary war. And in 1783, he hands his commission over. He disbands the army. He goes to the farm. You can trust him. He's a general. He'll be able to protect you against the British. You see this globe down here in the corner. It's a geostrategic office. It's all about foreign affairs. And he's wearing his general's uniform, but you can trust him because he's not going to try to create a stage of military coup d'eta. He he could have done that during the American Revolution and didn't. He's not going to be a Napoleon. Napoleon hasn't quite emerged on the scene, but he's he's not going to be another um uh when when Washington is elected, Napoleon hasn't emerged on the scene. By the time of this this painting, actually, some Americans have have begun to hear of Napoleon. Um but he's not going to become a Napoleon. Uh a Julius Caesar is going to make himself um emperor um Caesar. Um you can trust him. He's going to be big enough to to go against uh the Brits. It's a foreign policy office to defend us. All the early presidents are basic elected presidents are basically battlefield generals or secretaries of state. It's a foreign policy office. Um John Adams was in effect secretary of state, a leading diplomat under the Articles Confederation. Thomas Jefferson secretary of state, James Madison, James Monroe. Um all of the early elected presidents all the way up until Lincoln are either secretaries of state um America's leading diplomat are battlefield generals like Andy Jackson um like William Henry Harrison um like Franklin Pierce. The only elected president up to Lincoln who's not a leading diplomat or a battlefield general is James K. Pulk. So it's a foreign policy office. It's a milit commander-in-chief. It's about geostrategy. We see all of that. It's lonely here. Uh, it's a lonely office. We see the lurking presence of slavery. In the corner, there's actually Billy Lee, um, Washington's um, favorite slave whom he frees on his death, actually, um, setting a model, a precedent as ex-president, trying to to set a model for his country that alas is not emulated by all the great slave holders of Virginia. But Washington does provide for the freeing of his slaves, the ones that he owns at his death. and Billy Lee is one of them. But we see kind of the presence of of slavery um in this early um um presidency. One final thing, what we see and don't see, this is the Washington family and this is a stepgrandson, a custous a stepg granddaughter. They do not bear the Washington name. They do not bear his blood. They are not going to be heirs to the throne. In some ways the saddest feature of this and there's a certain somnity here but also a certain maybe sadness is there's an emptiness in the middle. What's not here? There's the rising su the American empire on the rise sort of. Um so a rising su n a rising sun but no s o n. Washington has no kids of his own. Um uh and there's sadness there. That's what he doesn't have. But precisely because of that, we can trust him. We can trust him because he's a military officer um who could have made himself president but didn't who can beat the British. We can trust him because he has no son of his own. He has a lot of wealth and power partly because he is a Virginia who does own slaves and marries a very wealthy um v Virginia um widow. Um so that's all part of it. Um but the anti-dynastic feature is here too. Maybe the most important part of this painting is what is not there. Namely an heir to the throne. In our next sessions we're going to talk more about America's presidency. So stay tuned. [Music]