Advertisement

On Electoral College, Harvard Is Divided

"The Electoral College was an inventive idea at the time when small states were sensitive about losing power to big states, but that argument is absurd now," said Ronald Heifeitz, co-director of the KSG's Center for Public Leadership.

Frederick Schauer, Frank Stanton professor of the first amendment and KSG academic dean, expressed a similar opinion.

Advertisement

"Regardless of the situation in 1787 [at the Constitutional Convention], for most purposes people think of our nation as a contiguous unit and that popular sovereignty is ultimately most important. The goal ought to be to keep state sovereignty minimal in favor of national unity," he said.

"Also, there is the argument that states are already well-represented in the Senate," he added.

But Schauer also sees the other side of the debate and the need to keep the Electoral College.

"We design representative institutions to represent semi-sovereign entities, such as states. The electoral system is designed to be a compromise between individual votes and states' rights," he said.

Some students at the College agree with Schauer.

Recommended Articles

Advertisement