The Electoral College has been one of the most debated topics in politics ever since its inception. The original idea behind the College was that, back in the 1700s, when communications were slow, voters were uninformed, and votes were counted by hand, the Framers needed a streamlined and efficient system for electing the President. The college worked – and made sense – back then. The question is: does it still apply today? Today, Americans have the technology to vote directly for a President, yet they don’t. The old system of electing electors to the college is still in place – and it should be. The Electoral College should not be abolished because it properly divides power - but still keeps it in the people’s hands, keeps extremists out of …show more content…
Most would agree that taking an extreme view on topics never is a good idea, as it pleases very few and angers many. This is the core of democracy – compromise. One excellent aspect of the Electoral College is that is it prevents extremists and eccentrics from gaining any traction in the government (Document C). As stated by Arthur Schlesinger: “The multiplication of splinter parties (small parties with ideas outside the mainstream) would make it hard for major-party candidates to win popular-vote majorities.” (Document E). Essentially, Schlesinger is saying that a switch to popular vote would cause more and more parties to start submitting candidates to the presidential election. An example would be the 1992 Presidential Election. The major candidates were Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ross Perot. In terms of popular vote, Clinton won with 43%. This means that 57% of Americans voted against Clinton. How does this make sense? Ross Perot, an eccentric billionaire, won nearly 19% of the vote, and added to Bush’s 37.5%, plus other unnamed candidates, makes up 57% of the population who didn’t want Clinton in office. This was with one eccentric billionaire. Imagine if four or five billionaires ran and got 10% of the vote. Someone might win, if it comes down to popular vote, with a range of 20-30% approval. This is why the Electoral College is more democratic than people give it credit – it prevents eccentrics from paying their way to …show more content…
The Articles of Confederation gave too much power to the states, so the country was transferred to a Federalist government, one that consolidates some power in the central government while leaving much of it with the states. The solution of keeping the power with the states was the New Jersey – Virginia compromise. This compromise formed the House and the Senate, which combined have 538 members. This, in turn, helped form the Electoral College. The College automatically apportions three votes to each state. This is where opponents of the College find fault. The prime example is a comparison of Alaska, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, North and South Dakota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wyoming to the single state of Illinois. These twelve states and the district account for forty-four electoral votes, and 12,500,000 people live there. Illinois, with a population of 12,830,000, only gets twenty electoral votes (Document D). Here, it seems as if the 12,500,000 people of the District and the twelve states are essentially getting over double the representation than the people of Illinois. And this is one hundred percent true – except it’s not. Imagine this scenario – someone who has lived in the Bay Area has voted liberal since they were eighteen, and is a proponent of
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
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 a system of voting created by the writers of the Constitution. The main goal of the Electoral College was to ensure that the citizens of the United States could not elect the president directly. The writers of the Constitution believed that the voters would not be properly educated on who they were voting for and consequently make a poor choice. The Electoral College is no longer in need today given that the public is adequately educated on the candidates for elections as a result of the excess amount of communication today. The Electoral College should be abolished because small states are over represented, the system is unfair to third party candidates, and a tie leads to a vote in the House of Representatives.
In this modern era of presidential elections,“the Electoral College ignores the will of the people. There are over 300 million people in the United States, but just 538 people decide who will be president” (Source D). In a country that globalized democracy, the nation itself is now letting the voices of hundreds overshadow the voices of hundreds of millions. Every four
The Electoral College, created by our founding fathers, is a well thought out system, created for the well-being of our country. Well-educated Electors are chosen because they fit certain qualifications and were elected to help keep the voting system more organized, so abolishing the Electoral College would not be the right thing to do. This process helps give equal opportunity to both the large and small states, and if it was abolished, it would do more harm than it would do good. Thus, the Electoral College should not be abolished because it gives equality to all states, whether they are large or small, the founding fathers introduced this process to us for the well-being of our country, and the Electors are more educated than most voters,
In today’s world, I believe the Electoral College is outdated and that it is time for a change. Established in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the Electoral College is the formal body which elects the President and Vice President of the United States. Each state has as many "electors" in the Electoral College as it has Representatives and Senators in the United States Congress, and the District of Columbia has three electors. When voters go to the polls in a Presidential election, they actually are voting for the slate of electors vowing to cast their ballots for that ticket in the Electoral College.
Unlike any other democracy in the world, the United States elects its president using the electoral college system. Not even state and local level elections within the United States use this archaic approach. The system was created to protect the interests of smaller states, yet it has failed to do so, meaning it is no longer relevant. The electoral college system is unfair and should be abolished because of the dominance of the winner-takes-all system, inequality of votes, and reliance on electors.
In 2000, George W. Bush won the presidency against his competitors--but not because the citizenry chose him. The Electoral College did. He received 543, 895 less votes than his competitor Albert Arnold Gore Jr (Doc G). However, he got more electoral votes, so he was the one sitting in the
The way the electoral college is not fair to the people if it come to a tie or nobody reaches the 270 votes needed because their vote does not matter anymore and it goes to the house of representatives and they will side with whatever party they are with, Winner takes all method makes it so third party does not have any chance to win at all even if a 50/49 vote all electoral votes will go to the 50%, Lastly it needs to be abolished because it is not fair to smaller states and prefers larger states with having a lot more electoral votes than other states. The electoral college is something that was working in the past because the states were not associated with any party and with the changes to America and her people the way we elect our leader needs to change
However, the Electoral college is, in fact, unnecessary for a multitude of reasons. The first of which is the change in population geography. In 1789, the entire United States only held about four million people (Kimberly). Compare that to the 326 million people in 2017, and the differences are staggering (“U.S. World and Population”). The Electoral College delegates a number of votes to the population of a state.
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.
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).