CESF Visiting Scholar Alexander S. Belenky

on possible changes to the U.S. electoral system

June 18, 2008

As the 2008 presidential election draws closer, questions of fairness arise once again. Is the U.S. Electoral College a good idea? Should we instead choose our presidents based on the popular vote?

On June 17, 2008, Center for Engineering Systems Fundamentals Visiting Scholar Alexander S. Belenky addressed these questions, and numerous others relating to the U.S. electoral system, in a lecture at the University of Manchester, in the U.K.

Dr. Belenky, who holds a Ph.D. in systems analysis and applied mathematics, is the author of several books about U.S. elections: Extreme Outcomes of US Presidential Elections (2003), Winning the US Presidency: Rules of the Game and Playing by the Rules (2004), and How America Chooses Its Presidents (2007).

Dr. Belenky contends that, contrary to popular belief, making the popular vote a decisive factor in U.S. elections would not necessitate the elimination of the Electoral College.

He told the audience in Manchester that "slightly modified election rules would let the country elect a U.S. president with a mandate from both the nation and the individual states, and would make all the states 'battleground' in election campaigns while keeping the Electoral College as a backup. These rules are likely to be supported by enough states to amend the Constitution, since all the states gain attention of the candidates while keeping all their Electoral College benefits."

According to Dr. Belenky, modifying the rules would mean greatly reducing the chances that currently exist for the loser of the popular vote to win the election nevertheless—as was the case in the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore.

Dr. Belenky also criticized media coverage of the election process, particularly its quantitative aspects. Media inaccuracies, he said, have led to inaccurate perceptions by the public regarding the nature of the current system and the feasibility of changing it.