It allows for some continuity and stability for the current government. “It contributes to the political stability of the nation by encouraging a two-party system and discouraging the proliferation of splinter parties such as those that have plagued many European democracies”(Thirty-Thousand.org 11). Lastly the electoral college helps encourage minority parties. Due to how the Electoral College distributes power, many minority interests have the ability to be represented and even backed by larger parties in order to get Electoral College votes. While a third party may have particular difficulty in securing a presidency, they can at least have enough delegates that their interests have to be taken
Should the Electoral College be Abolished? After the 2000 presidential election, and more recently the 2016 election, many have suggested that America abolish the electoral college, as it has elected the candidate with the lower popular vote on multiple occasions. Although a direct democratic approach to presidential elections (where the election is decided by popular vote) appears to many as an appropriate solution, this approach would grant too much power to large metropolitan areas, make rural votes practically irrelevant, and take away power from states. In order to prevent a situation like such, the electoral college should not be abolished—it must remain, but slight alterations should be made so that America is more equally represented.
It is just an obsolete framework that ought to be discarded. In numerous races before, Presidential competitors who did not win a greater part of the well-known vote, or even a majority, were chosen the president because of the Electoral College. Therefore, I support the statement that it should be
Many people will say the electoral college hasn’t caused that many problems. When you look at the big picture, both Republicans and Democrats have been hurt by the outcomes of some elections, mainly Bush vs. Gore and Obama vs. Romney. Republicans and Democrats are on board to abolish the electoral college. Just because the electoral college is in the constitution doesn’t mean that it is a good thing. If you look at the constitution you see all of the things that amendments have changed.
If the people were to elect the president directly, certain situations/problems wouldn’t be as analyzed like the Electoral College analyzes it. (McGraw Hill pg.385) If we were to get rid of the electoral college the states with a higher population would dominate the elections, therefore, leaving the small rural states unnoticed or with no voice. That would be very unfair towards rural areas, the present system gives the state’s power more strength and secures our federal system’s strength. (McGraw Hill pg.385) In order to make our voice be heard toward the candidate of our choice we should participate in campaigns as well as voting. The majority of our population doesn’t take the time to get politically involved and vote, making their opinion towards our government overlooked.
Even today, the Electoral College ensures that “the preferences of minority voters count for almost nothing” (Hoffman). The popular “winner take all” system of distributing electoral votes at the state level fundamentally disenfranchises the conflicting opinions of minority votes (Hoffman). In alternative systems of distributing electors proportionally or using the national popular vote, the ballots cast by minority voters across the country would significantly add to one candidate’s total. In this manner, the effects of the Electoral College with regard to suppressing minority votes is appallingly similar to the types of political gerrymandering banned by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. (Kelkar) The minority votes, even if they comprise 49% of the state population, get virtually nozero electoral representation in the vast majority of states.
I do not think this system is fair, I think it contradicts the fact that as Americans we are given the freedom to vote, but it seems as though the people’s vote actually doesn’t decide much. It has been proven in 2000, when George W. Bush lost the popular vote by .51% yet still won the electoral college vote by 271 to 266, this doesn’t seem right to me at all. Part of living in the U.S. is having the opportunity to vote for the person running your country, we are always told “our vote matters” which it does in a sense, but it seems more as though we are voting for other people to vote. The Electoral College system is very unequitable in my eyes. The people chosen for our electors meet on the Monday following
Since these officials may not have a greater degree of loyalty to the governor and might therefore seek to undermine his term of office. There are some roles that the state have some restrictions being as a major. The state bureaucracy is largely controlled by multimember boards and commissions with the results that the state is fragmented. They have been saying that Texas needs it governor to have meaningful budget authority so the budgeting system encourages some control over the government. If Texas has a more powerful governor it could have the legislature’s power could have some decreasing in the state, but by doing this the democracy is better served when the legislature is the more
Voters rank the presidential candidates from their least to most favorite. If a candidate wins more than half of the first choice votes, then that person wins the election. The process functions similarly when used in the Electoral College; the candidate that wins the majority vote in a state receives the electoral votes of that state. However, if no one wins the popular vote, the candidate with the least number of votes is removed from the ballot, and more than one person can be eliminated in this round (Best). Those that marked the eliminated candidate as their first choice will have their votes transferred to their second choice candidate.
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.
And they needed something to ensure that the major population centers, all of which existed on 'business ' fare more than agriculture and other earthy endeavors, couldn 't control this one and only national election endlessly. Thus, the Electoral College. Take away the Electoral College today and it is likely that you would wind up with one very powerful party the democrats and one far-less powerful party...the republicans. At best. this isn 't because the electoral college favors the republicans, though.
A candidate must reach a majority of 270 to win the election. There are many arguments for why the Electoral College is still effective - it strengthens the unity of the country by preventing the domination of an area with a higher population over rural areas. It maintains stability of our political environment by encouraging our bipartisan system, as it makes it very difficult for new parties to win enough popular votes to gain any traction in an election. Most importantly, it maintains a balance between state and federal governments, where the states have the power to select their own
The argument considering the validity of the electoral college system is home to many complicated components, therefore, creates very diverse opinions. In addition, not all voters are well educated as to how the system works as a whole nor the beginnings of the electoral college and why it was called to action. Because many people are only exposed to portions of the media, biases are easily founded. Some would argue that the electoral college helps the nation to manage large numbers of votes and essentially "round-out" a winner. When the elections are fairly slanted towards one candidate, the electoral college is helpful in fully distinguishing a winner.
Andrew Jackson was the winner according to the Electoral College, with ninety-nine votes. John Quincy Adams was behind him coming in at eighty-four votes and William Crawford was in third with forty-one votes. By these numbers, Jackson should have been the victor, but because he didn’t receive the majority of the electoral votes, he would not hold the office for the next U.S. President. In fact, not one of the candidates had received the majority of electoral votes. This means that the decision goes to the House of Representatives.
The Electoral College is a crucial component of how the President of The United States is elected. The votes cast by the Electoral College can outweigh the popular vote of the American public, so it would be consequential for the American public to be aware of the Electoral College and have at least a basic understanding of how it works. This, however, is sadly not the case. Even some of today’s elected officials are not up to date on how the government works. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute ran a poll of twenty-five hundred randomly selected Americans, out of the members of that poll that were elected officials only fifty-three percent of them answered correctly when asked if they knew what the Electoral College’s function was.