Teachers collecting and curating election materials might think this Electoral College Overview is a little over-the-top for their purposes and they’d probably be right, depending on their students. But one paragraph in it can exercise a vital historical reading skill while also repositioning how we all think about “reliable sources”.
The blue font and left-justified capitol dome isn’t quite as distinctive of National Geographic’s yellow box, but many teachers will instantly recognize the Congressional Research Service. Most would be correct in considering the CSR a “reliable source”.
“As a legislative branch agency within the Library of Congress, CRS has been a valued and respected resource on Capitol Hill for more than a century. The products in this collection were created for the sole purpose of supporting Congress in its legislative, oversight, and representational duties. New products are regularly produced to anticipate and respond to issues of interest to Congress on a timely basis.
Even though the Congressional Research service is a reliable source, it’s still important to use it with the same mindset Ronald Reagan used in nuclear disarmament negotiations, “trust, but verify.”
This two page In Focus article “highlights key aspects and recent policy developments” concerning the Electoral College, it’s a quick cheat-sheet for any Hill staffer looking for the Constitutional and legislative foundation of the Electoral College, the selection and responsibilities of Electors and the calendar of dates within which the states and federal government must act to select the President of the United States. That doesn’t leave much room in the two-page summary for historical background. US History teachers stuck condensing the New Deal into one-and-half class periods interrupted by a fire drill know what this feels like.
This is the one paragraph of historical background of the Electoral College.
Most teachers reading this one paragraph with students would drive them into Hamilton’s argument using just those two quotes. They’d use questioning and discussion to ensure students understood what Hamilton meant by writing that “the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided” as the presidency. They ask what he meant when he wrote that “[i]t was equally desirable that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of” an informed decision that was best for the country.
Then, they’d ask their students – “what do you think?” The discussion would spiral off into the eddies of opinion about the general public. Even if these teachers were lucky enough to have a lively, engaged class, the discussion wouldn’t explore much more than surface level examples of “popular passions” that Hamilton was writing about. This is standard fodder for social studies classes, easily mistaken for more valuable learning.
This approach doesn’t bring any attention to the writer’s choices in titling and writing this paragraph, which is why teachers should teach a different lesson with it.
Despite the s’ in the section’s title, it only includes only two quotes from one person, Alexander Hamilton. All lists of “Framers” are contrived, and in this one only Alexander Hamilton makes the cut, none of the Constitutional Convention’s 54 other attendees get a word, neither do any of the ardent debaters who argued in state ratification conventions that adopted the Constitution.
That’s not a mistake of the CRS writers, they only had one paragraph. Recognizing it however, is the responsibility of the reader. If this point rings true to you as a teacher and you’re confident your students can catch this right away, then be sure to take them to the next step – Who decides who counts as a “Framer” and who doesn’t? How many people participated in ratification debates in the states? (Pauline Maier and Woody Holton can help with this). Are they “Framers” also?
Beyond the choice of quoting just one person, the writers chose just two quotes. Imagine what the reader would think if given this other Hamilton quote:
“It may happen that this majority of States is a small minority of the people of America; and two thirds of the people of America could not long be persuaded, upon the credit of artificial distinctions and syllogistic subtleties, to submit their interests to the management and disposal of one third.” (Federalist 22)
What would students think if the CRS writers included Madison’s notes from the Convention itself? [Mr Hamilton] “saw none better than to let the highest number of ballots, whether a majority or not, appoint the president“
Practicing reading with this one paragraph helps students recognize the broad horizon of options available to writers when they make choices to use certain people, quotes and events to give you an understanding of the past. Developing this skill as a “muscle memory” as more long term value than a class discussion about public opinion.
Despite the use of two quotes from just one person to explain this historical background of the Electoral College (even if that person is Alexander Hamilton), our assessment of the CRS as a “reliable source” shouldn’t change, it should remain on the short list of sources we always turn to when we need concise, dependable information.
What should change is our concept of “reliable sources” and how we use that phrase with students. There are no sources that stand as “reliable” on their own. In our search for understanding of the past we need to read those reliable sources wisely, always recognizing our responsibility to “trust, but verify”. Using this one paragraph within an election or Constitution lesson gives teachers and students experience doing just that.