August 17, 2025
By Stephen Stofka
Sunday morning and another breakfast with the boys. This week Abel and Cain continue to explore a different way to elect a president. The conversations are voiced by Abel, a Wilsonian with a faith that government can ameliorate social and economic injustices to improve society’s welfare, and Cain, who believes that individual autonomy, the free market and the price system promote the greatest good.
After the waitress left with their order, Abel asked, “Remember that idea we were talking about last week? A new way of electing presidents.”
Cain nodded. “Yeah, by congressional district. No popular vote, I think I suggested.”
Abel continued, “This week I compared a winner take all state and one that allots its electors by Congressional district.”
Cain showed interest. “Really. It’s something I’ve been meaning to do. Family stuff has kept me busy. So what did you come up with?”
Abel said, “Well, Nebraska votes by district. They call it the Congressional District Method, which they adopted in 1994 (Source). Each congressional elector is required to vote for the presidential candidate who received the most votes in their district. At-large electors representing the senators vote for the candidate that receives the most votes in the state (Source, page 46, 47).”
Cain frowned. “I was looking to eliminate the popular vote for president entirely. If a Republican House Member is elected, then that vote goes to the Republican presidential candidate. If a Republican Senator is elected …”
Abel interrupted, “Senators are elected every six years. A Senator might not be up for election in that year. What do you do then?”
Cain laughed. “Drop back five and punt. I forgot about that. The class system ensures that there is always one senator from each state up for election every four years, but not both senators (Source).”
Abel stared out the window for a moment as their food arrived. “What if that at-large elector voted according to the majority vote of the districts in the state? Like, if Colorado has eight districts and there was a tie, then the senator who was not up for election would become the tie breaker.”
Cain nodded. “I like that. It’s the same role that the Vice-President plays in the Senate, so it’s in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution. Even better would be a system where the party of the senator who was elected that year determined a tie vote. It would get a lot more voters out to the polls, I think. ”
Abel finished chewing, then asked, “Is that your intent? Get people more engaged in voting?”
Cain replied, “There were two things I was trying to accomplish with this idea. A balance of power between political parties and the people they are supposed to represent. Under the current system, the electoral count distorts the will of the people. For instance, we have a closely divided House, indicating that the will of the people is fairly split. But the electoral count in the 2024 election was 312 to 226 (Source). Sounds like a mandate, doesn’t it? Trump claimed it was a mandate. The guy is a blowhard, but he is not the first presidential winner to claim a mandate based on the electoral count.”
Abel asked, “Are you hoping to restrain politicians? Trump could win by a few electoral votes and he would still claim a mandate. He reports his fantasies about what should be, not any objective reality. He claimed DOGE found $52 billion in savings. An analysis by Politico found that the savings were less than $2 billion (Source).”
Cain shook his head. “I don’t know how much of what Trump says is dementia and how much is braggadocio.”
Abel interrupted. “He opens his mouth and blows thought bubbles like we did as kids with bubble soap and a wand.”
Cain smiled at the thought. “Anyway, the second point of my idea was to give voters more of a sense that they had a voice, give them a greater sense of engagement. Like I said last week, too many voters feel disenfranchised in this winner-take-all system and don’t bother to vote.”
Abel nodded. “That’s what I liked about Nebraska. It’s a red state, but the voters in Omaha vote Democratic and their electoral vote is recorded as such because Nebraska splits its vote.”
Cain frowned. “The Nebraska legislature is talking about ending that system before the next presidential election. Party leaders care only about power, not the will of the people. It’s like Machiavelli said 500 years ago. The majority always wants to persecute the minority. This country was supposed to be different.”
Abel sighed. “The problem is that the U.S. Constitution was written without a thought to political parties. In the House and Senate, party leaders marginalize their rank and file members. Most of them act like ducklings following their mother.”
Cain laughed. “Ducklings? No, they are soldiers following their generals into legislative battle to protect the principles of the American people.”
Abel joined in the laugh. “Get out the flag. Play some patriotic music. Ok, so Kansas is also a red state but they have a winner-take-all system like most states. In 2024, there were only three counties that voted Democrat (Source). Each of those three counties are in different congressional districts and the Democratic vote would not be enough to carry a majority in the district (Source). So, in Kansas, their four district specific electors would have still gone to Republicans.”
Cain nodded. “Ok, but Colorado has eight districts and four districts elected Republican House members. Colorado has winner take all, so those eight electors were pledged to Harris. Why? Because Harris got 54% of the vote in the state (Source). In Kansas, my proposed system would not affect the results. In Colorado, it would have a big effect. Four electors for Trump, four for Harris. Using your idea about the tie breaker, two at-large electoral votes representing the senate seats would have gone to Harris. In the end, Trump would have gotten four votes, Harris six. The point is that the electoral count would reflect the will of the people, not this prejudicial system we have now.”
Abel argued, “Ok, take Colorado. They have already changed their laws to go in the opposite direction. In 2020, they voted to join the National Popular Vote Movement (Source). In other words, Colorado would cast its electoral votes according to the popular vote in the entire country (Source).”
Cain replied, “I think they are going in the wrong direction but that movement shows how much people don’t like the winner-take-all system.”
Abel smirked. “Well, according to Gallup, 58% of people favor a popular vote over the Electoral College (Source). Democrats favor the popular vote. Republicans the Electoral College system.”
Cain asked, “But how many like the winner-take-all system? A bunch of legal scholars wrote a brief presenting a legal challenge to the constitutionality of a winner take all system under the 12th Amendment (Source). Contrary to the spirit of the Twelfth, winner take all disrespects and disregards the will of the people. They noted that, in the 2016 election, almost all of the campaign events occurred in 12 key battleground states. In the 2012 election, almost 100% of TV ads were in a small number of states.”
Abel argued, “And those battleground states want to keep it like that. Lots of advertising revenue every presidential cycle.”
Cain sighed. “Yeah, that too. Anyway, the text of the Twelfth states that the electors should “transmit” the votes of the people (page 24). A winner-take-all system does not do that. The authors made a good case in questioning the constitutionality of these systems.”
Abel argued, “Your idea would eliminate the vote for president and award the vote to the Presidential candidate of that party that won the vote in each congressional district. What if a member of the Communist party won a district and there was no presidential candidate from that party?
Cain replied, “Then the vote would go to the candidate who won the most districts in the state. As we discussed before, ties would be broken as we discussed before.”
Abel sighed. “There’s still a coordination problem. All fifty states would have to change their election laws. Democrats in Colorado wouldn’t want to give up four electors unless the other states enacted a similar scheme.”
Cain frowned. “An amendment to the Constitution is a high bar. We’re back to what we just talked about, a violation of the 12th Amendment. Also, what about the 14th Amendment? I think I brought up that possibility last week.”
Abel said, “A few weeks ago, I had suggested that each party could choose a candidate from each of four regions, then choose a candidate at their nominating convention. I found that there is also a scheme with eight regions (Source). I liked that one. They split the western region into Pacific and Mountain states, which makes more sense.”
Cain nodded as he laid his napkin on the table. “The reason I liked the scheme with four regions is that the electoral votes were more evenly split. Each region had about 130 votes or so. How evenly are votes using the eight region scheme?”
Abel sighed. “Good point. New England, the Great Plains and the Mountain states have far less representation than the other five regions.”
Cain stood up. “The whole idea of the Constitution was a balance of power among political institutions and between those institutions and the will of the people. I think any reforms should incorporate that principle. I like the way we put our heads together on this idea. I got to run and meet my daughter.”
Abel nodded. “Hey, good talk. I’ll see you next week.”
/////////////////////
Image by ChatGPT