L&T Publisher Earl Watt
Nebraska’s Second Congressional District will surely join the rest of the state after the next legislative session in 2025, but for this year, the Second District will most likely be voting for Kamala Harris while the rest of the state will overwhelmingly vote for Donald Trump.
What’s wrong with that?
On the surface, nothing.
As a matter of fact, counting votes by district makes the presidential races even closer than they already are.
For example, if the entire country voted by legislative district for their Electoral votes, and then awarded two Electoral Votes to the overall state winner, like Nebraska and Maine, it would possibly more accurately reflect the will of the Electoral College while still honoring the promise and compromise made by the Founders in establishing the Electoral College.
There is one absolute positive about electing the president — it will never be done by popular vote nor will it be done by one vote per state.
Even if no candidate ever receives more than half of the Electoral College votes and the House has to pick the president, that process also makes statehood and population compromise. The entire delegation of a state has to agree on one candidate, and it would take 26 votes to become president. In Kansas, four representatives would combine to cast one vote, and in California, 53 would combines to cast one vote.
In 2016, Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College by a vote of 304-227. The total does not equal the 538 Electoral Votes because some electors voted for other candidates, like three in Washington voting for Colin Powell and another voting for Spotted Eagle, a Texas Elector voting for Ron Paul and another for John Kasich, and a Hawaiian Elector voting got Bernie Sanders.
Even though Trump won 304-227, voting by district would have made the race 290-248. Trump still would have won but only by 42 Electoral votes rather than 77.
Likewise, had the votes been counted by district in 2020, Joe Biden’s margin of victory would have been even thinner.
Biden defeated Trump in the Electoral College 306-232, a margin of 74 votes. But if that had been by district, the difference would have been 277-261, or a difference of only 16 Electoral votes.
Voting by district would be fine as long as every district across the nation did it.
But 48 of the 50 states don’t do it, and the two that have been doing it recently might only be resulting in a wash.
Why?
Because Mains selected Biden by nine points but gave Trump an Electoral vote for winning a Congressional district, and Trump beat Biden by 19 points in Nebraska, but District 2 provided Biden a win and an Electoral vote.
Bot of these states have small populations, and their Electoral vote has a slight weighted advantage over highly populated states. When small states divide their Electoral power by district, and large states don’t, the advantage is to the large state.
For example, Trump carried 23 districts in California but received zero Electoral votes. California, like 47 other states, distributes their Electoral College votes as winner take all.
Instead of allocating 30 districts plus the two at-large votes to Biden and 23 to Trump, they all went to Biden, all 55.
And even though Trump trounced Biden in Nebraska overall, Biden claimed the Second District, something denied Trump in California and elsewhere.
The opposite is true for Biden in Texas, where he could have been awarded 18 Electoral votes and Trump 22, Trump received all 38.
The numbers show a closer election when it comes to breaking down the Electoral College by districts, which is completely legal and Constitutional. Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz is proposing something that is not Constitutional — abolishing the Electoral College altogether and going strictly popular vote.
That won’t fly without completely unraveling the republic. The next target will be the Senate, removing it from the position of two votes per state. They are also targeting the Supreme Court because the socialist left wants to control every decision the court makes, and when it defends the Constitution over a knee-jerk reaction from the socialists, even if it is something supported by the majority. Remember, a republican form of government protects the individual from tyranny of any kind, even tyranny of the mob. Your rights are not determined by the mob. You were born with them. The socialist left wants you to believe your rights are granted to you by other more qualified people — your rulers.
That’s simply not true. That’s why they are attacking institutions like the Electoral College, the Supreme Court and eventually the Senate.
And that’s why states like Nebraska and Maine should revisit whether or not they should continue to distribute their Electors by district or as a winner take all until all states are willing to support a district-by-district system.
Unless the mob is willing to listen to you, why give a stronger voice to the mob?
When California and New York are willing to support district allocation, then the rest of us should join in. It wouldn’t have changed the last two elections, but it would have made them much closer, and in a country evenly divided, that is probably a more accurate picture. And it’s Constitutional.
