The Electoral College is sometimes considered puzzling. Its purpose and origin can be difficult to understand, and not seem necessary. When the system is understood, people have realized that this system is fallible, and called for reforms. One of the primary reasons for the creation of the Electoral College is that when the American government was being formed, it was believed that citizens could not be relied upon to properly select the nation’s leader. Some founders, Alexander Hamilton in particular, assumed that a candidate with tyrannical views would be able to sway the voters in his or her favor. A smaller group of people elected by the population would be more trustworthy, because they met infrequently and would be able to better comprehend the given information. …show more content…
For example, Wyoming is the least populated state, and its electors represent the population in a ratio of one elector per roughly 189,000 voters. California, the most populated state, is represented in a ratio of one elector per around 677,000 voters. This means that the votes cast by states with smaller populations, such as Wyoming, hold more weight than the votes from larger states. The Electoral College also typically causes candidates to focus on “swing states” more heavily than other states. Candidates campaign primarily in states such as Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, because these states are not always preferential toward one political party. Presidential candidates will visit and makes promises concerning these states, because it is assumed that they will win the votes of other states based on their political party. Because of this, states that usually lean only one way do not have their concerns prioritized, and are often only visited
This proposal will give each and every citizen a chance to vote. Statistics show that more people will vote if they know that there vote will make a difference. This proposal fits modern America because it will allow every American to make their voice heard when determing what President should be in office and what changes should be made. This system will allow the election of the President to be easy and fair. Direct Reflection with Instant Runoff Voting could be used with or without the Electoral College in effect.
Swing States and There Influence “A Democrat who lives in Kansas will never cast a meaningful vote in a presidential election in his or her life,” according reporter Ed Grabianowski. With this extreme statement Grabianowski is relaying the idea that in a democratic majority, like Kansas, one single persons vote isn’t significant. However, in contrast, states with where there is no definite majority each individual vote is central to which party the state will fall. These “important” states are called swing states.
These electors are here to represent the United States population of approximately 309,000,000 people. This would mean 1 electoral vote represents 574,000 people (Video 2). Every state must have at least 3 votes in the current system and the District of Columbia gets to vote even when it is not a state while territories like Puerto Rico do not get to vote even when people living there are US citizens. This
Preventing this is achieved by giving each state electors equal to the number of House Representatives and Congresspeople. This creates a mathematical advantage to those smaller states, preventing their voice from being trampled by large states like California and Texas (uselectionatlas.org 2008). Another debatable benefit of the electoral college is how well it solidifies Americas two party system. While it allows fewer options for the presidency, it also makes America more efficient, as only two parties have to debate on legislation. The electoral college also forces these two parties to be more moderate, because they have to appeal to at least a plurality of America.
For the example of California, it would be 55 members in the House plus the two members in the Senate to equal 57 electoral votes. 48 states are a winner take all with their electoral votes, meaning the candidate with the majority of votes in that state gets all of the electoral votes. The remaining two states, Nebraska and Maine divide their votes for the proportion that they win. During presidential elections, each state has its election and the people vote for who they want to be president, but they do not vote directly for the president. They electors see how the people vote and pledge to vote along with the majority, although it is very rare sometimes they do not vote along with the majority.
The American Founders were in favor of the electoral college. When the electoral college was created most of the people in America were not educated and could not read and write. Therefore, the Founders believed that the elections wouldn’t be fairly voted upon due to lack of knowledge from the people. Furthermore,
In the constitutional convention of 1787, our nation's founding fathers came together to come up with a method to elect a president at a time when the majority of Americans couldn’t make an educated decision when voting so Electors who trusted with the responsibility to represent their state and make an informed choice. Our founding fathers came up with an indirect method, the Electoral College, which proved successful by allowing Americans to choose their state representatives and senators who would represent their vote and through a majority choose a president-elect. Through the electoral college, each state gets two senators and a varied number of state representatives depending on the population of their state that the people vote for themselves
Small states are extremely over represented. The Electoral
This means that the minority supporters still get their say. Also, safe states for a candidate can give them less votes than the electoral college and safe states for the other candidate can give the rival candidate votes. Finally, “Candidates can’t simply ignore
Competitors won't intensely crusade in states they know they can't win or states they know they can't lose. Seeing an applicant vigorously battling in states that reliably vote a specific gathering, for example, New York (Democrat), California (Democrat), and Texas (Republican), is exceptionally uncommon or even non-existent. Rather, hopefuls will intensely battle in "swing states", expresses that don't generally vote a similar gathering, for example, Ohio, and Florida. Another contention against the Electoral College is that littler states are over spoken to, due to the way the votes or appropriated. In his article, ”10 reasons why the Electoral College is an issue”, writer Eric Black expresses, " An individual citizen in Wyoming has more than triple the weight in electoral votes as an individual in California" (Black,
Each state’s electoral number is equal to its congressional delegation (Mov. 2), which is the number of members of Congress plus two for the senators. The addition of the two senators in electoral value causes the votes of a common person in different states to be unequal. In a state that has a large population, the senatorial value makes a minor difference, but in a small state such as South Dakota, this addition causes its electoral value to be tripled, as cited in Document 2, a description of the Electoral College system during the 2000 election by a Duke professor. Thus, a common vote in a smaller state is worth more electoral value—proportionally—than a common vote in a large state. Even as a supporter of the Electoral College, Document 3, an excerpt from a conservative magazine, admits this imbalance between states, citing that small states are the main advocates for the process.
At first glance this doesn’t seem like a bad thing, everyone gets an equal say, right? Wrong! This means that Wyoming which has a population of about 500,000 voters will have an the exact same say in presidency as California which has a population of 35 million voters. Essentially, highly populated states will find that their individual votes count proportionality less.
Do not forget the “One person, one vote” doctrine which made it so anyone man 's vote was equal to others of a different state. This whole plan is not effective when big states do not get the representation that is needed to show their true feelings for a
For many years, America’s voting system has been criticized, with the main point of interest being the Electoral College. Some say that the Electoral College is necessary to streamline and simplify the voting process, while others say that it is outdated and takes away power from American citizens. After investigating the subject, it is clear that the Electoral College should be abolished due to the three major defects its critics find in the system; its undemocratic nature, its tendency to give small states’ votes too much power, and its disastrous effects on third-party candidates. The first, and possibly largest, defect in the Electoral College is its undemocratic nature. A professor of political science once said that “the Electoral College violates political equality” (Edwards 453).
However, many states make a requirement for the electors to vote for the candidate with the most votes of that state. The Electoral College was originally created to prevent the people of the United States from having too much power. Mainly because the creators of the Constitution, were very wary of any one group acquiring too much power. Also, at the time of the creation of the Constitution, it was almost impossible for citizens to be able to go and cast