Winner-Take-All System Analysis

1305 Words6 Pages
In 1787, between the months of May and September, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia to address the problems that the central government had under the Articles of Confederation. At this convention, state delegates discussed how to strengthen the federal government while at the same time guarantee rights for the people. They also discussed ideas that dealt with the process of electing the president and vice president of the country. As a result of this convention, the Constitution and the electoral college emerged. The electoral college was proposed near the end of the Constitutional Convention by the Committee on Unfinished Parts, chaired by David Brearley of New Jersey, to provide a system that would select the most qualified…show more content…
According to Britannica 's definition the winner-take-all system, means that the candidate with the most votes wins that state’s electoral votes. Under winner-take-all systems, a slim majority of voters can control 100% of seats, leaving everyone else effectively without representation. Winner-take-all election systems do nothing to provide representation to any group making up less than half of the population and the high percentage of the vote needed to win the election can be a severe barrier to minority candidates. Since many areas are dominated by a single political viewpoint, winner-take-all voting systems will often result in elections where one party has a stronger influence than another party does. The state of Texas, where the majority is Republican, and the state of New York, where the majority is Democratic, are two examples that represent this…show more content…
Many people choose not to vote in an election due to the fact that their vote is not effective in influencing the outcome of an election. This system of voting within the electoral college also generally favours large states over small states, meaning that they also do not have much influence in an election turnout. This problem requires reform because not only does it underrepresent the minority opinion, there is also a possibility that the winner might not be the candidate with the most popular votes. In fact three U.S Presidents, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, and George W. Bush in 2000, were elected with fewer popular votes, only winning the election because of the electoral votes they received. In the 2000 presidential election, George W. Bush’s 271 electoral college victory over Al Gore’s 266, prompted renewed calls for reforming the electoral college. Al Gore had won the nationwide popular vote by more than 500,000 votes over Bush, yet he still lost in the electoral college. Several reforms were called during this time period, all different methods that would benefit the country. One of these reforms included a district plan, which would give electoral votes by legislative district rather than at the statewide level. This reform is similar to the current system in Maine and

More about Winner-Take-All System Analysis

Open Document