Participation Paradox: Single Voting

Congressional gridlock is not an uncommon thing in congress. Congressional gridlock happens when there is difficulty passing a law that is trying to satisfy the needs of the people. Gridlock often makes us feel stuck. Neither political party can reach an agreement to enforce a law on an issue, therefore they continue to meet and discuss until a conclusion is made. Gridlock is also referred to as “deadlock” or “political stalemate” because it is almost as if there is nothing either party can do.

A lot of people are convinced that their vote doesn 't count. In predominantly republican or democratic states people don’t even bother voting because they know it won 't make a difference. Next, is that small states have more representation than states with a larger population. One person does not mean on

The popular vote, the people’s vote, is not really utilized, other than providing information to the electors in the Electoral College in order for them to decide for whom to cast their vote. Instead of a person voting for the national election, they are voting for the state election, which is not really going to affect the results of the national election because of low populations in some states. For example, North Dakota, with a population of 723,393 may not have much of a say versus California, with a population of 38.8

Caused by the flaw in the federal law that electors do not have to vote for whom they have pledged for. However, a punishment is given if they choose to go down that route "($1000 fine)". The issue with this is, when voting, rather than directly voting for the campaigner a voter is actually voting for his/her elector. And in return, the elector will vote for that campaigner. Rendering citizen votes useless in elections if the citizens don 't even get to choose who they wish to be president.

34% is not the majority of the people, whereas 51% is. This detail highlights that if we were ever to transfer smoothly to a different system, a party would not be chosen particularly by the bulk of the citizens. This would create more disruption in the country, which is definitely not needed

These can easily be seen in the U.S. legislature with the use of filibuster. When only a small portion of the population desires partisanship then legislators will have little reason besides personal belief to refuse to compromise, but if a large portion of representatives refuse to budge and are split, or polarized, on the topic then little can be done to progress or improve the discussion. These same unmoving individuals continue to be reelected, because they are satisfying their population’s desire for partisanship (Lee 170). Polarization by itself can also hinder the democratic process, because it can reduce the competitive nature of politics (Sørensen 430). It does so, because constituents would likely keep the “bad” politician in their party in power, instead of voting for the other party’s representative (Sørensen 432).

The Articles of Confederation only had 1 representative per state. This was a problem because the ratio of population to the 1 representative was unfair. Another problematic example with the Articles of confederation were that the government could not tax people. This idea seems great when you are a person of the country, but in reality it soon backfires. The government then had no money to build roads, or schools, or do anything because it did have have any money.

It is also believed that the Electoral College makes potential voters not want to vote at all and they end up not representing their candidates. And most people already have a certainty of the outcome of the election, meaning they already know who will win the election based on the number of votes so far in the popular votes section and the electoral section. The system of electors is also not fair because the people can not control who they are voting for has the electors, and the states number of electors are equal to the number of people on its congressional delegation, which gives big states an advantage over small states. To conclude this letter, I again say that the Electoral College should be changed to election by popular vote because, popular vote is fairer then the Electoral College, the people have no power compared to the electors and the are subject to corruption with in the

We aren’t even close to the full population voting during the election. From this past election, people still don’t understand how Clinton won the popular vote, and lost the election, and then they think this is all unfair. But that is not how the founding fathers had planned for it, because if the majority always won, then the minority would always lose. Also, there are so many people that don’t really understand politics and what each candidate represents and will do, if we

1.11 Limitations Due to the small sample size used for this study, results may not be generalized. Sampled respondents may not have answered all questions with candor, and therefore the results of this research based on the opinions of the sampled group might not accurately reflect the opinions of all members of the included population. This is more so because, people generally feel reluctant to divulge correct information about their incomes and tax

The political attitudes of Americans do not have a cognitive

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

Cann found that there is very little difference between voter guides and postcards indicating where people can find the voter guides online. This is because knowledge about the content within the voter guide was low for both the paper guide and the online guide. However, a weakness in this study is that it was not geared to see of voter guides have an effect on voter

The reason I mentioned that is bipartisanship means both parties have to come together but some time with parties they think bipartisan ship means one republican jumps on a mostly democrat bill or vice versa. That’s not bipartisanship at all what it is, is congressmen giving each other favors in order to pass a bill. There isn’t much give and take which means it’s not bipartisan. Also bipartisanship stops gridlock but if there are positions that one side feels that needs to be addressed it and it doesn’t then it pays off to be partisan.

The Articles of Confederation had many problems and therefore it made the government weak. One of may problems was that under the Articles Of Confederation was that there was no executive branch, and so nobody could enforce or carry out laws made by Congress. Another problem was that each state only had one vote in Congress. When each state only had one vote states that had small populations had the same amount as a large state.