Pros And Cons Of The Electoral College

Rio Kuchlyan

Mr. Puma

AP Language and Composition

2 March 2023

In Support of the Electoral College

Voting is one of the most fundamental ways to participate in a democracy, and every citizen in a democracy deserves to have their voice heard. However, in a vast nation such as the United States, how is this achieved? Consider an ordinary citizen, perhaps a farmer living in rural Kansas. They must constantly consider the various things they have to manage, whether it be their crop production or any threats they face. The only way for them to get any assistance from the government is by voting; however, is it likely that the government will hear such farmers’ voices? After all, millions of people living in urban areas such as New York City will

This is certainly a valid argument that has merit. Harvard University political scientist Gautam Mukuna states, "[t]he fact that in presidential elections people in Wyoming have [nearly four] times the power of people in California is antithetical at the most basic level to what we say we stand for as a democracy" (qtd. in Liasson). This aspect of the electoral college is illogical as in a democracy, such as the United States, every citizen should get an equal say in determining presidential elections. By allowing the Electoral College to exist, we are going against the basic principles of our democracy. One adverse effect due to this system is that there have been cases where a winner of a presidential election did not receive the majority of votes: “[t]he Electoral College [often] produces results counter to the majority: The winner takes all within most states. You get all of Michigan’s electoral votes whether you win by one vote or a million votes” (Cohn). The winner-takes-all system of the Electoral College essentially misrepresents the votes of an entire state, explaining why there is opposition to this voting system. A direct effect of this is evident when looking at larger states such as California. Say 51% of California’s voters voted for the Democratic Party, and 49% voted for the Republican

The popular vote would have several disadvantages, as seen by studying how previous elections would have played out through the popular vote system. For example, looking at the Nixon vs. Kennedy presidential election of 1960, one can quickly determine that John F. Kennedy had defeated Richard Nixon through the Electoral College. However, when trying to count the popular vote, an issue appears due to an error in Alabama. Due to some issues, it was impossible to objectively determine who had won the majority of votes in Alabama. Consequently, there was a discrepancy between who had won the national popular vote, thus having no way to determine who won the presidential election through the popular vote (Craig). The popular vote relies on one dangerous assumption that a large nation like the United States can perfectly count all their votes. In a perfect world, the popular vote would certainly be a viable option. Realistically, however, it is simply too idealistic. On top of the popular vote system, there are many issues with ranked-choice voting. Although ranked-choice voting theoretically ensures that the candidate with the majority’s support is chosen, this does not always occur. These issues were present in the 2010 election in Australia that used ranked-choice voting: “[t]he liberal Labor Party won the Australian House