The electoral college is the way the president is picked, but should it remain that way? The electoral college has too many ways to go wrong and as time goes on we 'll just see more of them, and in many ways, it smacks the idea of democracy in the face. It has picked candidates contrary to popular opinion and gives states disproportionate amounts of power in picking the president, along with other problems. In a country to supposed to stand for freedom and each citizen having a voice, how is that possible when people in one state are given more power over choosing the president than someone in a bigger state. As was previously stated, it gives certain states more power and makes the votes of people in certain states worth more than a vote
These eleven states are; California (55), Texas (38), New York (29), Florida (29), Pennsylvania (20), Illinois (29), Ohio (18), Michigan (16), Georgia (16), North Carolina (15), and New Jersey (14). Granted a candidate would almost never win all eleven states because the majority of these states tend to be predominantly democrat or republic, the fact that only eleven states alone can determine who 's the president puts to question the value of the remaining 39 states. Document B, explains the winner-take-all method and how unfair the method is to third party candidates. The chart shows how even though both third party candidates won about 7% and 19% of the popular vote but won 0% of the electoral vote. In Document E, Will states “the winner-take-all electoral vote allocation tends to produce a winning margin that looks like national decisiveness” There are over 300 million people in the United States, but just 538 people get to decide
The Electoral College: Indispensible or Unnecessary? The Electoral College plays a vital role in American politics — so why is it so misunderstood and so frequently criticized? The Electoral College is the method by which a president is elected: each state and the District of Columbia hold voting contests, then cast a set number of electoral votes for a candidate based on the results of the state contest. A candidate must gain 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. The system may seem confusing or unnecessary, but its importance is revealed by the care taken by the Founding Fathers in designing the Electoral College, which was described in more detail and at greater length than any other issue addressed in the Constitution (Guelzo and Hulme).
After completing the mock Congress simulation, I obtained a greater understanding in how a bill becomes a law in addition to the factors that may prevent its passage. The diversity of roles that students were assigned as representatives offered a glimpse into how complex the legislative process really is. Bills are passed with the near universal intent of positively impacting the American people. However, this impact may not be universally distributed across demographics and in some cases it can hurt the constituents that one represents. With so many agendas, public and private, clashing and coinciding with each other in Congress, even the smallest of bills require a massive collective effort to become law.
Political parties have been a part of the United States’ government since the end of Washington’s presidency and they have become the backbone of how people shape their opinions and view the government. However, these parties were inevitable and would have happened had they been a part of the government process or not. Political parties had to form in the 19th century in order for people to successfully win elections at all, as it was hard for candidates to get their views out to the people, and because people need a group that they can sympathise with and support. In the beginning of the American democratic system people were just acclimating to the idea of being able to participate in the government and form their own opinions. This is the main reason the political party system was considered evil by people like George Washington who
John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, Bill Clinton and George W. Greenery won their specific races despite a minority of the renowned vote. Discretionary College has a tendency to make clear victors. This shows up distinctively in connection to the surely understood vote, which remains for the most part close in about each and every presidential
In fact, if the Electoral College system was not in the Constitution, it would undoubtedly be removed due to it being unconstitutional, because using the electoral votes violates the principle of one-person, one-vote. (Black, 2012) So, while it is clear that the Electoral College was set up to ensure all states have a voice, it now seems to have the ability to take away the voice of the people. It is necessary to look at our voting process and make the necessary changes needed to ensure the process of electing our President represents the voice of the people. By switching to a majority vote we ensure that the voice of all people are not only heard, but are represented equally, which is how it should be under the one-person, one-vote
The Electoral College chose electorates who where most knowledgeable and informed individual who was not biased and did not have a political party would be elected in each state. The original plan did not last too long, only through 4 presidential elections, it was later changed for the second time, but had many flaws and made a mess with tiebreakers going to Congress and the Senate, also the
Conclusion The Missouri Compromise only led to a balance between slave-holding and slave-free states but failed to address the issue of slavery permanently. As evident in this paper, the Missouri Compromise was only meant to draw an agreement between the south and north instead of a solution. The failure of the north and south representatives to agree on gradual progressive emancipation in Missouri shows that a long-last solution could not be reached. Despite its, inadequacies, the Missouri Compromise marked a political change in the
They were always going to be outvoted because of each estate only got one vote. The commoners fought back for their right to a fair vote. They wanted equal representation and equal votes. The Third Estate reason for this was because they thought that the ones that worked and paid taxes were the nation. The voting should be done individually by the delegates.