Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota and Democratic vice presidential candidate, took to the stage at a fundraiser in California on Tuesday to declare that the Electoral College “needs to be abolished.”
According to a report from CNN,
“I think we all know that the Electoral College needs to be abolished. We need a national popular vote, but that's not the world we live in. So we need to go and win in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. We need to go and win in western Wisconsin. According to the pool report, the Democratic vice presidential candidate. told supporters gathered at Gov. Gavin Newsom's private residence that they needed to come to Reno, Nevada, and win.
The report also adds that the Harris campaign quickly retracted Walz's lament. In a provided statement, they emphasized that Walz does indeed believe that “every vote counts in the Electoral College.” They also portrayed his journey through battleground states as a noble quest to secure the necessary 270 electoral votes. In his remarks, Walz simply “(lauded) and thanked (donors) for their support in funding these efforts,” the campaign added.
Walz made similar comments earlier in the day at a fundraiser in Seattle, according to Politico.
harris waltz records
CNN reminded readers that Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has previously expressed interest in discussing the possibility of abolishing the electoral college system. In a 2019 interview when she was running for president, Harris said she was “open to the discussion” and pointed out that the popular vote had lost its importance in deciding the presidency.
According to the New York Times, Walz has previously expressed support for abolishing the current voting system in favor of a popular vote. Last year, as governor, he signed a bill that added Minnesota to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which commits states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. The paper called the agreement a “terminus to the Constitution” that would allow “states to bypass the Electoral College.”
Just recently, at a New York fundraiser hosted by investor Alex Soros and former Clinton staffer Huma Abedin, Walz reiterated his criticism of the Electoral College. During the event, he expressed “hope for the country” but emphasized a “realistic” understanding of the system, according to Politico. While Walz acknowledges the close nature of battleground states and supports a move to a national popular vote, he and Vice President Harris continue to focus on the “energy” and momentum in critical battleground states under the current election system. He said that
dissatisfaction with federalism
Mr. Walz's dissatisfaction with the Electoral College is clear. He will need to appeal to small towns and rural areas, such as Beaver County, Pennsylvania, and battleground states of Wisconsin and Nevada. Representing rural, industrial, and blue-collar workers, these voters, with diverse political leanings that can fluctuate between elections, are at the forefront of the economy, especially in areas affected by fluctuations. They often prioritize issues such as stability, job security, health care, and support for local industry. Manufacturing and Agriculture. Unlike voters in more liberal-leaning urban areas, these communities often focus more on practical concerns than on broader ideological bases.
Clearly, by arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College, Waltz ignores federalism, a core principle of American republicanism. The Founders designed the Electoral College to protect the voices of small states and prevent densely populated urban areas from dominating elections. Alexander Hamilton argued in The Federalist No. 68 that this system avoided the risks of mob rule and temporary passions and ensured balanced decision-making in choosing the president.
Walz's call to dismantle the system may sound appealing to some, but it reveals a lack of awareness of its purpose. Ironically, his campaign is based on securing the electorate, but he criticizes the very system that guarantees broad representation of the people. Rather than principled opposition, his rhetoric may reflect frustration at not being able to focus solely on “progressive” urban hubs, particularly on the East and West Coasts.
criticism
The Trump campaign criticized Walz's frank advocacy against X, calling for the abolition of the electoral college system. They sarcastically asked him why he “hates the Constitution so much.”
Democratic Party promotes abolition of electoral system
In recent years, Democrats have increasingly pushed to abolish the electoral college system, especially after the 2000 and 2016 elections in which the winner of the popular vote lost the presidency. The argument is that this system undermines the will of the majority by allowing candidates to win without securing the most votes nationwide. After Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump in 2016 despite (officially) winning the popular vote, she called for an end to the electoral college, calling it outdated.
These efforts gained further momentum in 2020 amid widespread calls for electoral reform, with some critics tracing the origins of the Electoral College to the power of slave-owning states and the protection of racial inequality. It's tied together. Figures like Stacey Abrams have also pointed out that the system disproportionately affects voters of color. Lawmakers such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) argue that the Electoral College gives smaller states more say at the expense of the majority.
Despite continued calls for change, preservation of the Electoral College remains essential to maintaining the balance of political power across the United States. Initiatives such as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which aims to award electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, are gaining attention. However, a major shift toward abolishing the electoral system would require a constitutional amendment, which is highly unlikely in today's polarized political environment.
