Electoral reform has periodically been an issue of immense importance, and as long s the potential for crisis remains, this issue is certain to recur. What would constitute an electoral crisis is, foremost, an indecisive contest, and, secondarily, a failure by the electoral vote winner to capture a plurality of the popular vote. A number of proposals for electoral reform have been advanced, ranging from simple alterations of the present Electoral College system to comprehensive reformations such as adopting a district plan, proportional division of the electoral vote, or direct popular election of the president. In this paper we investigate how the impact of various social groups on the outcome of a presidential contest would be altered under each of the reform proposals. A simulation methodology is used, with baseline data on group voting obtained from the 1960 contest between Kennedy and Nixon. Our results indicate that, in comparison with the popular vote, the Electoral College advantages the following population groups: large-state residents, metropolitan area residents, Negroes, Catholics, and possibly low-income persons. The district and proportional plans, by generally disadvantaging these populations relative to the popular vote, would build a reverse bias into the electoral system.