"But while the Senate simply requires a majority of its 100 members to select the vice- president, the House must vote by states, with each state delegation having a single vote, and a majority of the states (at least 26 of 50) required to agree on the winner.
The unit rule has been employed twice in US history, in the long-ago elections of 1800, when Thomas Jefferson emerged as president, and 1824, when John Quincy Adams was elected. " Larry Sabato
Larry Sabato, then a little known political science professor at the University of Virginia, was a "talking head" at the Republican state convention that nominated George "Macaca" Allen for governor of Virginia. Sabato confidently predicted that Allen would never be elected. Somehow, Sabato has come to be an authority on many things.
This article is quite entertaining. It puzzles over the intricacies of US election law in the eventuality that there is a tie vote in the Electoral College. What fun! The federal nature of the US union is always the subject of complaint in election years. The basic issue is that the little states (in population) have, in many ways, the same political weight as the big states. In the US Senate, this factor is always with us, the product of the Great Compromise that made the union a possibility in the first place. A lot of people do not like that. I suppose that they live in big states. Sabato makes the statement that US "values" are different now than they were…. I doubt that. Perhaps political science professors have different values than they once did, but, then, there were no political science professors on hand when the constitution of the United States was written. Thank God.
The futility of the discussions concerning American federalism always impresses. The little states are clearly not going to accept any constitutional amendments that deprive them of the division of function and power that was the basis of the union to begin with. A bargain is a bargain.
How about a constitutional convention? Yes, how about it? Could the scope of the changes wrought by such a convention be limited in advance? The first constitutional convention seized control of the process and created a new kind of government. It had been called to modify the Articles of Confederation. Would the new document be subject to ratification by the states? What would happen if some states did not ratify?
Let sleeping states lie. pl