Div Dasani
Mrs. Stauffer
AP Lang- 4
17 October 2014
Government
Should the Electoral College be preserved? Four presidential elections in the United States have resulted in a candidate winning the presidential elections without actually managing to acquire a plurality of the popular vote. Normally this is not justifiable in any democracy; however it has happened numerous times in America due to the Electoral College. The Electoral College violates the democratic principles it seeks to maintain and should not be preserved. In the United States, the Electoral College is a collection of people who represent each individual state, who cast votes to elect the president and vice president. This body is currently comprised of 538 people;
…show more content…
According to Source D, All states are guaranteed at least 3 votes in the Electoral College, regardless of size, and only after this is populace considered. This disproportionate distribution radically skews the power in the favor of small states. Low population states like Wyoming for example, have one congressional representative for every 200,000 people, while states with high populations, such as Texas, have only one congressional member for every 670,000 people. Furthermore, consider the case of the all-or-nothing allocation issue. In this method of election, a state gives all of its votes to the candidate who garners the largest plurality of the popular vote in that state, regardless of the proximity of the difference in popular vote. For example, a candidate would reap all 21 votes from Illinois, regardless of whether the competitor won 51% of the popular vote or 99% of it (Source B). This system is impractical and unjust as it nullifies the voice of the populace voting for the minority candidate in that state, which allows for almost half the people of a state not having a say during an …show more content…
According to Source G, when the Electoral College was first created by our founding fathers, the average voter had little opportunity to learn about presidential candidates or their policies, and thus the job was given to the Electoral College. These select individuals were far better educated in the field of politics and were more capable of making an informed choice than the average citizen. In modern times however, with an educated population and mass media, voters can learn about candidates themselves and thus be trusted to choose their president. Furthermore, in the early years of the nation, travel to the Washington D.C. could take as long as two weeks, and new policies or events that were revealed during this time could alter a voter’s decision on his preferred candidate. Thus it was necessary for a body of representatives to make decisions on the behalf of the people they represented in real time. In today’s age however, with data carried through fiber optic cables adept at transmitting information in mere seconds, the general public is capable of making decisions on policies as they are being presented regardless of their location, making the middlemen representatives that embody the Electoral College an unnecessary violation of democratic
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.
In a survey conducted by Lydia Saad, “Sixty-three percent would abolish this unique, but sometimes controversial, mechanism for electing presidents that was devised by the framers of the Constitution”. Furthermore, “between 61% and 66% of all major party groups saying they would vote to do away with the Electoral College if they could” (Saad). Most Americans as well as politicians are ready to get rid of the extremely flawed electoral
Based on the pie charts, the reader is shown that presidents that did win the popular vote, did not win by that large of a margin the Independent candidate and other major-party candidate split the votes. The Electoral College only shows a larger win ratio. Abolishing the electoral college would “...encourage single-issue ideologues and eccentric millionaires to just into presidential contests” (Document E). Although these people tend to run anyways, the electoral college is a way to ensure that the people with no political background or people that do not qualify as president will not win. The Electoral College was originally built for a world that did not have mass media and a way for people among the U.S. to communicate, but presently, the Electoral College serves as a way to ensure
One of the United States’ fundamental beliefs is the idea that fair taxation with equal representation. Author of, “5 Advantages and Disadvantages of Electoral College”, Louise Gaille, elaborates, “In national representation, each state and population district receives equal representation, in either the house or the senate, and that allows individual voters to still have a say in what happens” (Gaille). The Electoral College was built on compromises the Founding Fathers made to ensure the equal ability for everyone to impact the decisions made in the country. Without national representation, states with smaller populations won’t have their votes as considered as the votes from larger states. For example, although Wyoming makes up about .18% of the population, they still control .56% of all electoral votes.
The existence of the Electoral College has remained a source of debate for the population of the United States for centuries. Despite the evident discontent surrounding it, the United States is largely unaware of the disconnect between citizens’ voices and the Presidency. It can be said that popular sovereignty, no matter how pleasant a concept, has become little more than an illusion the people cling to. In short, the Electoral College is an institution that must be abolished, because it violates political equality, is unfair to third party candidates, and is not an accurate representation of the people’s votes.
The citizens in the 12 states and the District of Columbia have a louder voice in the election process than the citizens in Illinois. The 12 states and the District of Columbia have less population combined than Illinois but they have more electoral votes than Illinois. (Doc D) Citizens in Illinois or other large states have less say proportionally in the presidential election than citizens in small states, meaning their votes are not equal. The Electoral College depends only on states where voters vote for presidents, which is politically inequal. (Doc D)
However, the state of Illinois has a population of 12,830,632 with 20 electoral votes. There is an obvious violation in this principle as it is illogical how smaller states seem to have more of a voice than the larger states. These examples show that the Electoral College should be abolished because it violates the political principle of political
The electoral college also helps the small states have an opinion that actually is heard in the presidential election. In class, it was discussed that Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota together, though their combined population is less than that of Oklahoma, each of those states has three electoral votes, whereas Oklahoma just has seven votes. Going by electoral votes, a candidate would have a better chance at winning the election if they won over Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota versus Oklahoma. With the electoral college, a candidate could win over all thirty-nine small states and win the entire election. Though the candidate could be supported by less than a quarter of the population,
Along with that, why would a voter feel their vote matters when candidates barely campaign in their state? Presidential candidates tend to ignore states they know they either have no chance of winning or are guaranteed to win in. Another argument against the electoral college is that small states are overrepresented. For example, a voter in Wyoming has almost quadruple voting power than a voter in California. California has 1 electoral vote per 712,000 people while Wyoming has 1 electoral vote per 195,000 people.
In 1787, years after the founding of the United States, the Constitutional Convention met to decide how the new nation would govern itself. The delegates understood that the need for a leader was necessary but still bitterly remembered how Britain abused of its power. The delegates agreed that the President and Vice President should be chosen informally and not based on the direct popular vote, thus gave birth to the Electoral College. The Electoral College is defined as “a body of people representing the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the election of the president and vice president.” Since 1787 the Electoral College has been the system for voting in the United States, but with our nation ever more changing and growing it
The Electoral College is the process to which the United States elects the President, and the Vice President. The founders of the Constitution came up with this process. This was done to give additional power to the small states, and it was done to satisfy them. It works by the citizens of the United States electing representatives called electors. Each state is given the same amount of electors, as they are members of congress.
The Electoral College system the founding fathers devised helps to balance out the power of the large, populous states. This system forces candidates to campaign in all states since they all carry some sway in the elections (“Understanding the Presidential Election”). However, other issues present themselves as well, like states with large independent voters that can be swayed and the issue that a candidate can lose the popular vote and win the election. The first issue is that states that are equally divided between democrats and republicans and hold a large number of electoral votes like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania are considered swing states. (“Understanding the Presidential Election”)
The creation of the Electoral College was the result of one of the many compromises of our Founding Fathers. The intentions of such a system were developed to create fairness for smaller states and to prevent an unsuitable candidate from acquiring the office. Although it has been rare, the possibility that the Electoral College and not the popular vote would decide a presidential election was intended in its creation. The pros and cons of such a system have changed over time and are heavily debated in our current circumstances. Due to advancements in technology not envisioned by the founders, alternatives have been suggested to resolve the conflicts of what some feel is an outdated system.
Several years after the United States came to be, the Constitutional Convention met to determine how the new nation should govern itself. The delegates saw that it was crucial to have a president and vice president, but the delegates did not want these offices to reflect how the colonies were treated under the British rule. The delegates believed that the president’s power should be limited, and that he should be chosen through the system known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a body of people who represent the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the electing of the president and vice president. Many citizens feel that the Electoral College goes against our nation’s principle of representative democracy, while others
Electoral college has been with us since the birth of the constitution, and to this day we are still using this type of system to this day. The Electoral College is a system that the United States uses to elect our upcoming presidents and vice presidents. Each state has electors equal to their senate member and house of representatives, however who ever gets the highest popular vote in the state gets the electoral vote. The issue is the Electoral College do not give votes to the people, but to the states. Which has some unfair consequences.