Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine
Save Your Time And Money
| AnyBook4Less.com | Order from a Major Online Bookstore |
|
| Home | Store List | FAQ | Contact Us | | ||
| Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money |
||
 |
Title: The Electoral College Primer 2000 by Lawrence D. Longley, Neal R. Peirce ISBN: 0-300-08036-0 Publisher: Yale Univ Pr Pub. Date: September, 1999 Format: Paperback Volumes: 1 List Price(USD): $18.00 |
Average Customer Rating: 4.5 (2 reviews)
Rating: 5
Summary: Very interesting, and ironic in light of recent events
Comment: I am writing based on the 1996 edition.
This is a book that focuses on the workings and potential problems of the Electoral College. There is a good deal of historical discussion, but the book is primarily concerned with the Electoral College of today. Much of this book is adapted from Pierce's The People's President (Simon and Schuster, 1968 & 1981, which I also recommend). In light of the recent election, this book is very relevant.
The authors strongly feel that the Electoral College should be abolished in favor of a direct popular vote. The authors stress the well-known criticisms of the Electoral College regarding wrong the "wrong winner", popular vote percentage distortion, faithless electors, and third-party shutouts.
The book especially stresses the potential for chaos in a three way race, opening with a fictional 1996 race that is ironic in light of recent history...
Bob Dole wins a popular plurality (barely), Bill Clinton wins an electoral plurality (barely), but Ross Perot carries enough states (including Texas) to deny anyone an electoral majority. Both parties persuade some Perot electors to defect - but not enough, so the Electoral College deadlocks and the vote goes to the House. The Republicans have a narrow majority in the new House - but not by states (it's one-state-one-vote) so the House deadlocks. The VP vote goes to the Senate, but the new Senate is 50-50 so it deadlocks too.
(Note: the authors maintain that the outgoing VP cannot cast the tie-breaking vote in such a case - an open question which would surely go to the Supreme Court.)
On Inauguration Day, there's still no President-elect or VP-elect, so House Speaker Newt Gingrich becomes Acting President. But it's STILL not over...
The House can keep voting until one of the three candidates carry 26 state delegations. And the Senate can keep voting until 51 Senators make Al Gore or Lamar Alexander (Dole' running mate) VP (and also Acting President if the House remains deadlocked). Acting President Gingrich must govern knowing that his stay in the White House can end at any time if either house so chooses...
In January 1999, the newly elected Congress finally selects the winner of the 1996 election.
The balance of the book is divided between historical narratives and mathematical analysis of how the electoral and popular votes diverge. I found the narratives very interesting, the analysis less so.
A chapter entitled "Recent Crisis Elections" discusses 1948, 1960, 1968, 1976, 1980, and 1992. I disagree with the title; the only crisis elections were 1800, 1824, 1876, and 2000. However, the chapter is quite interesting - 1948, 1960, and 1968 almost went to the House. Particularly notable are the Alabama 1960 vote (a hybrid slate of 6 unpledged and 5 Kennedy Democrats won - so what was Kennedy's real popular vote?), the Hawaii 1960 rival electors, and the 1976 election night (which dragged on until 3:30 AM and had a retraction - sound familiar?).
Other chapters discuss a variety of points:
Why was the Electoral College created and how has it evolved?
When did the "wrong winner" win? Almost win?
How are the electors chosen?
Can a state legislature appoint electors itself? (Yes. It was the rule in antebellum South Carolina and common nationwide until 1824.)
How often have electors been faithless?
What if the electoral votes are disputed?
What if a candidate dies before Election Day? (It has happened.) Before the electoral votes are cast? (It has happened.) Before they're formally counted? (Never happened.) Before Inauguaration Day? (It almost happened - to FDR in 1933.)
What if the election goes to the House?
This book contains a lot of information that should be more widely known, especially in light of the 2000 election. I would have appreciated more historical narratives. The well-known controversies of 1824 and 1888 and the crises of 1800 and 1876 are discussed, but could receive more treatment. If there is a 2004 edition, obviously the authors will have a lot to say about 1876 and 2000.
Some interesting elections which could have been discussed are:
1836: The Whigs run three regional candidates to throw the election into the House. They fail, but the VP race goes to the Senate because Virginia's 23 electors vote refuse to vote for victorious Democrat Van Buren's running mate, Richard Johnson - Johnson reportedly married one of his slaves!
1844: An abolitionist candidate tipped decisive New York, giving the election to proslavery expansionist James Polk over moderate Henry Clay. The annexation of Texas and the Mexican War ensued.
1860: Lincoln wasn't even on the ballot in the South, but won a popular plurality and an electoral majority. This would have still happened if his three opponents united.
1864: No electors were appointed from the Confederate states, although Lincoln asserted that they remained in the Union in law. I believe Congress formally excluded the seceded states from the Electoral College. This would have been interesting precedent if Florida in 2000 ended up with no electors. Would Gore win 267-246 with 25 abstentions, or would it go to the House because 267 of 538 is not a majority?
1868, 1872: Some of the South had no electors due to Reconstruction. Ditto.
1880, 1884, 1888: A single close state (New York) tips the election each time. 1880's popular vote nationally was 10,000 out of 9 million, 1884 is remembered for the fateful "rum, Romanism, and rebellion" slur, and 1888 is remembered for the "wrong winner."
1896: The Democrats and Populists nominate William Jennings Bryan, but with separate running mates. Had he won the election, this would have been interesting, because his electors did not all vote for the same VP.
1916: No controversy, but the closest electoral vote (277-254) between 1876 and 2000. California's 13 votes decides - by 4,000 votes out of a million.
The book is fairly concise while still covering a lot of interesting ground. Recommended.
Rating: 4
Summary: Very Informative Book
Comment: This is the perfect book for anyone who has never quite understood how the electoral college works (or, even, why we still use it) in national elections for the President. It highlights the historical foundations for its formation, as well as specific, historical examples--where its existence has proven to be questionable (at best), in terms of electing the President of the U.S. This book's timeliness can be seen in the current presidential-election situation--which has called into question the electoral college's capability, in being able to elect "the people's choice" to the presidency.
 |
Title: Securing Democracy : Why We Have an Electoral College by Mitch McConnell, Gary L. Gregg II ISBN: 188292665X Publisher: ISI Books Pub. Date: 01 November, 2001 List Price(USD): $24.95 |
 |
Title: Bushwhacked : Life in George W. Bush's America by Lou Dubose, Molly Ivins ISBN: 0375507523 Publisher: Random House Pub. Date: 23 September, 2003 List Price(USD): $24.95 |
Thank you for visiting www.AnyBook4Less.com and enjoy your savings!
Copyright� 2001-2021 Send your comments
