Abolition of the Electoral College There is a need to abolish the Electoral College because it is outdated and problematic. It has caused the candidates with less popular votes to win the presidency. Many people are against the Electoral College for this very reason. In the past the Electoral College has caused controversy because of its problems and there has been a need for reform. The Electoral College was created at the Constitutional Convention. Williams says, “The Electoral College was established in Article II of the Constitution and was amended by the 12th Amendment in 1804 (28). “It was created as a compromise for the presidential election process because some politicians believed that a purely popular election was too reckless and …show more content…
Williams suggests that the founders thought that the Electoral College was a sensible plan, but things don’t always work out how they should (28). It is a relic of America’s predemocratic past when leaders were scared of having too much power over the people (Klinker, McClellan 1). Congressional Digest suggests that we are stuck in a time warp (31). We still rely on a horse-and-buggy election system in the age of the internet (Congressional Digest 31). Congressional Digest points out the fact that voters today know more about the candidates than they did 200 years ago (19). “Is it possible that this once-brilliant device has become a constitutional accident waiting to happen” (Congressional Digest 25). “The Electoral College has been said to be ‘archaic,’ ‘too complex,’ and even ‘dangerous,’ but the principle complaint has been that it is ‘undemocratic’” (Klinker, McClellan 1). The Electoral College violates the principle of one-person, one-vote (Congressional Digest 17). Klinker states that Wyoming’s 619,500 residents make up only .18 percent of the U.S. population, yet recieve three three electoral votes which is .56 percent of the electoral votes, while Texas has a population of 20,044,141 residents that make up 7.35 percent of the U.S. population, but Texas’ 32 electoral votes make up slightly less than 6 percent of the electoral votes, giving one voter in Wyoming nearly as much power as four voters in Texas (1). “The votes of those living in small States count for more than those residing in large States” (Vandenburg 189). Many small states are assured 3 electoral votes regardless of population, giving them more power (Klinker, McClellan 1). “What remains of the Electoral College is merely a scheme for apportioning votes by state in a way that grossly distorts the principle of one person, one vote” (Klinker, McClellan 1). Some believe that the Electoral College protects
Hayes who was in the Republican party and Samuel J. Tilden who, opposite of Hayes, was in the Democratic party. The Electoral College was first developed with the constitution to serve as a compromise, because people thought Congress should elect the president while others thought the popular vote should have the decision. Each state has a minimum of three electors which is constructed of two senators and a representative. The more representatives a state has, the more electors granted. Although the popular votes do not determine the elector votes, it almost always happens where the electors vote for whom the popular votes resulted in.
Perhaps the most common argument supporters of the College make is that it protects the smaller states. Because of the two electors each state receives regardless of population, electors in Wyoming represent fewer people than electors in California. Without the Electoral College, supporters claim, a candidate could run solely in the most heavily populated states and win, while ignoring rural states. This is the main reason why, even though there have been calls to abolish the Electoral College, it is unlikely to happen. The less populated states have too much power in amending the Constitution.
Smaller states, or states with a smaller population are given more electoral votes per voter than larger states. For example, for every 177,556 residents in Wyoming is equivalent to one electoral vote. However, in Texas, 715,499 people are the equal to one vote. In New York, a vote is around four times less than a vote from Wyoming. These two examples show how much “voting power” certain states have.
For those who object the winner-take-all principle, they worry that the Electoral College system has: the risk of so-called “faithless” electors and the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout. On the other hand, arguments in favor of this principle defend that it: enhances the status of minority interests and maintains a federal system of
The United States is a government republic, with chose authorities at the elected (national), state and neighborhood levels. On a national level, the head of express, the President, is chosen in a roundabout way by the general population of each state, through an Electoral College. Today, the balloters essentially dependably vote with the well-known vote of their state. All individuals from the government council, the Congress, are straightforwardly chosen by the general population of each state. There are many chosen workplaces at the state level, each state having no less than an elective Governor and council.
Since the inception of our constitution in 1787, there has only been 4 elections where the Electoral College has allowed the future president-elect candidate to win the election, despite losing the popular vote. 4/57 elections is probably something that political scientists don’t lose sleep over, but it is a topic that is worth mentioning and discussing, especially after the controversial presidential election in 2000. From my point of view, I believe that the method we use in selecting our presidents is flawed and ineffective for a couple of reasons. First, the Electoral College has far fewer votes than the American people, yet their vote has a lot more meaning. With 538 delegates representing the Electoral College, it is unfair and inequitable to the millions of people who devote their time and energy to stand in long
The Federalist system of our government requires there be a sharing of power between branches, which is very much enforced with the Electoral College. There are speculations that with the abolishment of the Electoral College, the Federalist system would be lost with it. The Electoral college also helps to promote the two party system, and while some people may take issue with this, it is a way of creating stability in our government. With the distribution of power the Electoral College promotes, this allows the minority to be represented. However, there is a big issue in that the majority vote is not properly reflected by the Electoral College.
With the electoral college in place we see that some states have more power than others when it come to the vote depending on their size and the amount of senators they have. As an example we see in Texas they have 38 electoral vote and California has 55(Document A) Compared to the 3 in Montana and 4 in idaho (Document A) we see that Texas and California have a lot
All through the history of the United States of America, many people have discussed the abolishment of the Electoral College. For many reasons, some believe it is what makes our country have the type of government we have, some believe that it's what limits the power of the government, and many people such as Mitch McConnell believes it is what gives us our freedom and prosperity. While these are valid arguments there is a multitude of reasons to why the electoral college should be abolished. Such as there is only a need for twelve states in order to become the president, popular vote of the people for president can still lose, and the Swing states are given too much power and attention compared to that of the other states. This is why I believe in the abolishment of the Electoral College.
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,
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 is one of the most important systems in the United States’ elections, and a deciding factor in every general election for the presidency. Established in 1787, the College has been a system in the US for quite a while. Some people would say that it is unconstitutional, because in some elections people who didn’t even get the popular vote still won, and others say that it is a great and founding system that is integral to a fair election. In my opinion, it is a great system that is very much needed in our election process and I believe our country would be a lot different without it. As one of the most important systems in the US, it’s hard to imagine how elections would be in the absence of it.
The Electoral College system assures balanced power between the states, puts the independent parties under control, grants balanced voting, and supports the major political parties. The Electoral College has proven itself to be very sufficient in determining the president and the vice president of the United States. Since this system has been successful since our Founding Fathers created it, there should be no reason as to why we should get rid of the Electoral
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.