Electoral College Voting System

Despite the waning support for amending the constitution to alter the way American’s cast their ballots, throughout each election cycle media outlets discuss the fear surrounding the minority candidate, in terms of the popular vote, becoming the President. In an interesting article published by Forbes magazine just before the 2012 elections Taylor Broderick discusses the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-sixth amendments and explains how these create a precedent for altering the U.S. voting system through amending the Constitution (Brodarick, 2012). He also argues that the Electoral College incites voter apathy in states which are not saturated with campaign efforts. In other words, people are more likely to participate in an election if they live in swing-states where candidates are actively campaigning. For these reasons, along with American’s historical opposition, Broderick believes politicians should gain public support for Congressional action, as Bayh did in the late 1960s, to throw out the current voting procedure.

Citizens often feel their votes do not matter if they do not live in crucial swing-states, as their electoral votes are predestined for one party or the other. In states that do not punish faithless electors, residents may also fear that public opinion will not impact the way electors cast their ballots. Finally, as four Presidents lacked majority support but still took office it is not surprising that American’s have lost faith in the Electoral college system. Media outlets continue to voice this opinion despite fluctuating support over the last three generations. However, when the majority vote can not even sway a Presidential election it is difficult to predict how majority support will incite change in a system that is already disenfranchising