# Was the Electoral College intended to be an independent deliberative body? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2019, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092 "2019-09-12T06:33:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2019, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/1 "2019-09-12T06:33:33Z")
The impression I get from [Federalist 68](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._68) is that the idea was the electors would gather without prior commitments to any candidate, but, rather, discuss among themselves who should be president, the way Congress discusses legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2019, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/2 "2019-09-12T12:58:37Z")
Well, just for laughs, I looking into the early cases of “faithless” Electors (i.e. ones who vote in ways other than expected) and it looks like the first case was a mass revolt in 1836 by Virginia’s slate. I gather from this that Electors had previously been expected to vote in a certain predictable way, and had they been independently discussing their choices, there would be earlier examples of surprise outcomes, i.e. they were never intended to be independent (though the penalties for “breaking faith” were tepid), regardless of how their role is constitutionally defined. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/3 "2019-09-14T15:31:26Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > The impression I get from [Federalist 68](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._68) is that the idea was the electors would gather without prior commitments to any candidate, but, rather, discuss among themselves who should be president, the way Congress discusses legislation. Any deliberation would be specific to each state, as electors meet in their own state. But the system [DEL]is[/DEL] _was_ designed to work without the general population becoming involved in electing the president and vice president, without political parties, and without national campaigns. It was written for a Republic, not a Democracy. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/4 "2019-09-14T15:56:44Z")
They originally were intended to be independent, but like so many of the Founding Fathers’ plans, that plan didn’t survive even first contact with reality. Remember, the Founders never even conceived of the notion of political parties, even though they themselves were members of them. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2019, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/5 "2019-09-14T19:02:21Z")
On reflection, the electors were probably intended to be independent in the same sense that the election of the president and vice-president were intended to be separate. It’s true on paper and in theory, rather less so in practice. ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/6 "2019-09-15T03:11:00Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > It was written for a Republic, not a Democracy. Let’s drop that canard. The USA is a democratic republic – as opposed to, say, an aristocratic republic like the old Venetian Republic, where only the nobility of the Golden Book could vote. (Granted, in the early USA there were sometimes property or even religious qualifications for voting – but the seeds of democracy were there, and universal white manhood suffrage was thoroughly established by the time of the Jackson Administration.) IME, anyone who says “America is a republic, not a democracy,” is not arguing but ranting. When he actually means anything by it, what he means is that America is a federal state, not a unitary state – which is true, and important, but has nothing to do with any supposed antithesis between a democracy and a republic. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/7 "2019-09-15T04:04:46Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > Let’s drop that canard. The USA is a democratic republic – as opposed to, say, an aristocratic republic like the old Venetian Republic, where only the nobility of the Golden Book could vote. (Granted, in the early USA there were sometimes property or even religious qualifications for voting – but the seeds of democracy were there, and universal white manhood suffrage was thoroughly established by the time of the Jackson Administration.) > > IME, anyone who says “America is a republic, not a democracy,” is not arguing but ranting. When he actually means anything by it, what he means is that America is a federal state, not a unitary state – which is true, and important, but has nothing to do with any supposed antithesis between a democracy and a republic. I would really like to know why you think that a republic is a bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/8 "2019-09-15T04:33:04Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > I would really like to know why you think that a republic is a bad thing. It is not a bad thing, and is not in any way incompatible with democracy. Granted, there are such things as aristocratic republics, but even those are probably preferable to hereditary monarchies. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/9 "2019-09-15T05:37:11Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > It is not a bad thing, and is not in any way incompatible with democracy. Granted, there are such things as aristocratic republics, but even those are probably preferable to hereditary monarchies. So… is North Korea preferable to Canada? Maybe I should move. ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/10 "2019-09-15T19:38:36Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > So… is North Korea preferable to Canada? Maybe I should move. Canada is a monarchy like NK is a democracy. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/11 "2019-09-15T22:20:58Z")
Legally, Canada IS a monarchy and North Korea is a republic with some arguable form of aristocracy (i.e. privelege to those born to certain families), but no matter. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/12 "2019-09-15T23:32:22Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Legally, Canada IS a monarchy and North Korea is a republic with some arguable form of aristocracy (i.e. privelege to those born to certain families), but no matter. Given who its’ last three rulers were, one could call North Korea a hereditary monarchy without torturing the term very much. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2019, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/13 "2019-09-15T23:41:02Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Legally, Canada IS a monarchy and North Korea is a republic with some arguable form of aristocracy (i.e. privelege to those born to certain families), but no matter. Is a completely farcical monarchy actually relevant though? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/14 "2019-09-16T00:29:33Z")
> [@E-DUB](#): > > Given who its’ last three rulers were, one could call North Korea a hereditary monarchy without torturing the term very much. Well, you wouldn’t have to _torture_ the term. Sending the term and its children and grandchildren to a re-education camp should suffice. ---
**Author:** ![whitetho](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whitetho/32/1059_2.png) [@whitetho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whitetho)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/15 "2019-09-16T00:46:50Z")
My understanding is that, instead of a single deliberative body, the individual state electors were more akin to a number of independent nominating groups, and the expectation was that in most cases there would not be an immediate winner of a majority of votes, so the members of the House of Representatives, voting as individual states, would make the final decision from a slate of candidates. Remember that the original provision in the Constitution specified that the top _five_ electoral vote-getters were the ones that the House members would choose from, if no one received a majority of electoral votes. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2019, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/16 "2019-09-16T02:31:01Z")
That was Farrand’s understanding. In the “Framing of the Constitution”, one of the first detailed studies of the documents from the Constitutional convention, he concludes that the drafters thought most elections would be decided in the House. Bear in mind, the US at that time wasn’t a nation in the modern sense of of a unified political culture. Communications were poor, and someone who might be a political heavyweight in Georgia could be a complete unknown in Massachusetts, and vice-versa. The Electors would nominate local political figures, and the House, made up of individuals who had greater familiarity with politicians from other states,would decide. One of the unexpected successes of the US experiment was the rapid development of a national political culture, aided by political parties. That political culture quickly eliminated much of the regional uncertainties that the drafters were familiar with, and enabled the emergence of national political figureres. Politicians in Massachusetts began to know political figures in Georgia and so on. The Electors didn’t ever really fulfill that role of nominators. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2019, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/17 "2019-09-17T18:59:38Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > Let’s drop that canard. The USA is a democratic republic – as opposed to, say, an aristocratic republic like the old Venetian Republic, where only the nobility of the Golden Book could vote. (Granted, in the early USA there were sometimes property or even religious qualifications for voting – but the seeds of democracy were there, and universal white manhood suffrage was thoroughly established by the time of the Jackson Administration.) > > IME, anyone who says “America is a republic, not a democracy,” is not arguing but ranting. When he actually means anything by it, what he means is that America is a federal state, not a unitary state – which is true, and important, but has nothing to do with any supposed antithesis between a democracy and a republic. Not a canard. I said “_was_” and I meant it, too. Andrew Jackson does not count among the founding fathers of this nation; most of the actual founding fathers were decidedly aristocratic by modern standards, the social elite of their own day. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2019, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/18 "2019-09-17T19:51:34Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Not a canard. I said “_was_” and I meant it, too. Andrew Jackson does not count among the founding fathers of this nation; most of the actual founding fathers were decidedly aristocratic by modern standards, the social elite of their own day. > > ~Max True, but, I should hope, no longer relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2019, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/19 "2019-09-17T20:03:10Z")
> [@kirkrapine](#): > > True, but, I should hope, no longer relevant. It would be relevant to adherents of originalism, eg: Justice Ginsberg, Justice Gorusch, or most famously the late Justice Scalia. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![kirkrapine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@kirkrapine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kirkrapine)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2019, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092/20 "2019-09-17T20:08:18Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > It would be relevant to adherents of originalism, eg: Justice Ginsberg, Justice Gorusch, or most famously the late Justice Scalia. > > ~Max The Dred Scott decision was predicated on the assumption that, in the time of the FFs, the consensus was that a black man had no rights a white man was bound to respect. But I doubt any originalist would be so bold as to rule that the Constitution requires property qualifications to vote because that’s how it was back then, or anything else that would be an element of an aristocratic republic. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-electoral-college-intended-to-be-an-independent-deliberative-body/840092.md?page=2)