This blog allows students of Mr. Chazen's AP US Government classes to continue discussions, debates and conversations concerning issues and topics introduced in class.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
#5 Should we keep or abolish the Electoral College
Please provide your viewpoints on whether the US should keep the Electoral College and replace it with another system.
Because of its strong foundation in American history, the Electoral College system should not e abolished because it prevents political chaos and turmoil from occurring. One of the ways it does this is by giving the states more power in voting for the president. Based on population, states get electoral votes, which provides smaller states with more of a day in government. This system also maintains representation throughout the nation by directly correlating population with the number of electoral votes a state gets, creating fairness throughout the nation. The Electoral College also prevents factions in the government would "rig" the election by gerrymandering to give the majority party an advantage in which the people have no say whatsoever. So, in order to maintain the most potential of democracy, the Electoral College must stay in place
I agree with Abby on the benefits of the Electoral College because of the balance of power established for the states. For example, if the Electoral College was never added to the Constitution, states with more population would have much more power on the selection of presidents. This would mean that a candidate could win elections just by gathering votes from states that have more population. If a majority vote were practiced in America, then it would be unfair for smaller states for having a smaller population. The Electoral College fixes this problem by balancing the power of election between larger and smaller states. Other methods of voting may solve the problems of the Electoral College, but still wouldn’t work. If a vote based on districts was put in place, then gerrymandering would simply allow a party to dominate the selection of candidates. While the Electoral College may not be in the people’s best interest, it keeps other forms of loopholes from exploiting the election process.
I believe that we should abolish the Electoral College. It seems that we are getting too many problems with the Electoral College in this day and age that it is not worth keeping around. Just because our founding fathers made it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is right. The whole reason that the Electoral College was made was so that the poor and uneducated people of the United States. However today we have great public schools accessible by everyone, so the government can no longer use the excuse of an uneducated public, which was one of the reasons for the College in the first place. Also if the person that gets a majority vote, but still loses I feel that it’s not only unfair to the candidate, but to the majority of the people in the United States. When 51% of people want a presidential candidate to become president, but the guys that got 49% of the popular vote wins, it’s just a slap in the face to democracy. Also if we just did the cut and dry “whoever gets the most votes wins” we wouldn’t have all these cases like Florida, or if the election became a tie and had to go to the House of Representatives, then it would become even more unfair because each state only gets one vote. This could also lead to a further tie because there is only 50 states. Also the Senate would pick the vice president if the House had to pick the President. This could lead to a president ship with the president being a Republican and the Vice-President being a Democrat.
I believe that we should abolish the Electoral College. It seems that we are getting too many problems with the Electoral College in this day and age that it is not worth keeping around. Just because our founding fathers made it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is right. The whole reason that the Electoral College was made was so that the poor and uneducated people of the United States. However today we have great public schools accessible by everyone, so the government can no longer use the excuse of an uneducated public, which was one of the reasons for the College in the first place. Also if the person that gets a majority vote, but still loses I feel that it’s not only unfair to the candidate, but to the majority of the people in the United States. When 51% of people want a presidential candidate to become president, but the guys that got 49% of the popular vote wins, it’s just a slap in the face to democracy. Also if we just did the cut and dry “whoever gets the most votes wins” we wouldn’t have all these cases like Florida, or if the election became a tie and had to go to the House of Representatives, then it would become even more unfair because each state only gets one vote. This could also lead to a further tie because there is only 50 states. Also the Senate would pick the vice president if the House had to pick the President. This could lead to a president ship with the president being a Republican and the Vice-President being a Democrat.
The Electoral College should be abolished. It is an outdated way to vote in the President, and it has had mistaken in the past. The Electoral College gives too much of an advantage to a candidate when they barely win a majority, for example California. Also the reason the framers created the Electoral College on the first place is outdated in two ways. One, it is ridiculously slow. It used to be that the way to vote or get any message through to the government was by horseback which would take days to get to its destination. Nowadays, it takes nanoseconds to give a piece of information 1000s of miles away. So we no longer need a slow and tedious way of exchanging information. Secondly, the Electoral College was created because the framers did not trust the common people to vote for the correct candidate. This was back when the US was only 13 states with a smaller amount of people that generally knew the people running and the framers feared that they would just vote for their friend. Nowadays, the U has millions of people and a vast majority too. The people also look closer at the actual politics of the president. They are much more capable of voting for a president. Overall, the Electoral College is an old fashioned method that needs to be abolished.
Although Abby and John bring up some very valid points, the electoral college is, in essence, pointless. Originally created both as a safety net against the illiteracy of America and to streamline the election process, both of these uses have been deemed pointless by the wonders of modern technology. And now, over 200 years later, the only functions of the EC is to mildly protect minority rights and "prevent political chaos". What is not realized, though, is that while the EC may protect smaller states, it actually heavily favors the majority party. Because a winner-take-all system is present in almost all states, the minority is effectively oppressed for the sake of unity of the majority. While this may bring up issues relevant to smaller states that would not have been mentioned otherwise, in the grand scope of things this actually shuts down those issues. Politicians will spend most of their time campaigning in swing states, hoping to rack up more votes. What this means is that all of the other states, with an obvious majority party, will be ignored, and the issues important to them will be ignored. This isn't the protection of minority rights, but the selective screening of certain states and issues important to a small portion of the population. The EC system does not protect minority rights, nor prevent chaos. Rather, it transfers power to a select few people, whose votes are the only ones that matter in the scope of American politics
The United States should keep the Electoral College for several reasons. The Electoral College orients elections around the states instead of giving Congress another decision to make along with their other powers. It draws public attention to the states, and gives the states more power because the states let their electors decide for the state’s population instead of having Congress vote on the president for the entire nation as a whole. Another reason the Electoral College should stay is because if there was a national popular vote, re-counting the votes would take even longer if they had to go over votes of all of the states. The state of Florida’s re-counting of the votes took an extended amount time to figure out, so having this state’s re-counting of votes be made on a nationwide scale would take even longer to do. A huge reason why the Electoral College needs to stay is because abolishing it would take a constitutional amendment. These amendments require two-thirds of Congress’ approval and three-fourths of the states’ ratification. Such requirements are extremely hard to fulfill, especially for this proposed amendment. The controversy over the Electoral College only occurs when there is a close election and is not a huge issue most of the time, so it is not a primary issue in the government. In addition, the Electoral College maintains the federal system of representation laid out in the Constitution, because the number of electors is equal the number of senators added to the number of representatives of a state. This way, big states have no fair advantage because the small states will still have at least three electors, even with a small amount of representatives. The big states will have more electors based on their larger population, so it remains fair. Also, electors are qualified to make tough political decisions that most normal citizens cannot, and will vote more fairly. This follows the desire of the Framers to have superior people who were smarter than the common citizen to make a wiser decision on who should become president. The Electoral College encourages a two-party political system due to its winner-takes-all system of votes, and this contributes to the political stability of the nation. Since presidents have to pay closer attention to more evenly divided states to win close races, this is fairer to the system of election because candidates won’t just work to win big in their political strongholds. This makes political parties more inclusive instead of more exclusive, which is only paying attention to certain favorable parts. Also, the fact that candidates must be appealing to states all over the country instead of one supportive area ensures that the candidates are well liked over a majority of the nation.
The way the electoral college is functioning well, and there is no need to change it. Furthermore, if there was no electoral college, nothing would stop the states from each just voting for their state representatives. This would give the big states a substantial amount of power over the small states. But with the Electoral College, the big states are kept from having too much power. Even the very small states like Alaska or North Dakota get three electors because they are entitled to a representative and two senators. Another positive side to having an electoral college is that it primarily revolves around the states. Every states vote really does matter in the elections. Plus, the Electoral College creates majorities. Sometimes, presidents don’t win by a clear majority by popular vote. This could make things very complicated, however, the Electoral College is usually able to come to a majority vote so there was no extra chaos. In cases where there is a tie, the vote would go to the House of Representatives to decide the president, and the Senate would choose the Vice President. Even if this were to ever happen, the small states are still protected from the big states. No matter how many representatives there are, each state still only receives one vote.
The Electoral College has many pros and cons to its system. One good thing about the Electoral College is that it is based on the population of the state that way say a state like delaware, where the population isn't very high, doest get the same amount of votes as a state like California might have. Even with this though their are both positives and negatives about the Electoral College I think that the Electoral College isn't the best way to decide who our president should be. One of the reasons is because the candidate that has the majority of the vote doesn't always win the Electoral College. For example, say a state that has a high population like California has a very close race and one party ends up winning with a 51% majority. Well all the votes of the Electoral College go to that one party and none go to the other party. So a candidate could end up winning the popular vote of the people but they end up losing because they didn't win the Electoral College. Another reason why I think the Electoral College isn't the best is because say a candidate wins the majority vote in a specific state, the votes in the Electoral College could still go to the other candidate. They take the people’s vote into consideration but they don't have to vote for the candidate that the people voted for. So in a sense the people don't have as big as a say as they think they do, because the Electoral College can discard what the people think and go off of what they think would be best for the country. I think today the way we should elect the president should just be by the majority vote and not the Electoral College. We have the technology now today to be able to keep track of everyone's vote and the party with the most votes gets the President and Vice President of the party they represent. It is only fair for the President position to go to the candidate that got the most votes. Also it makes everyones vote have more say in the election process and not have a point system based on a state's population.
The Electoral College should, beyond a fraction of a doubt, be abolished. Arguments like "it will cause political turmoil" are, AT BEST, defeatist logic (if we can't ensure victory then why try at all) and at worst support the aristocratic machine promulgated by the Electoral College. The first argument for abolishment is TRUE democracy: if the people cannot be trusted to elect our president, why should the people be trusted to make ANY decision. The founders, although they did establish the basis of all modern democracy, also created a model so flawed that the United States doesn't promote a similar system. The only real argument the founders had was that the people where uneducated. While there may be some people who lack higher education on average the common man is far more educated now than in the 18th century, the people are ready to take the choice. The main argument brought up against those dastardly villians who reccomend keeping the evil that is the Electoral College is that there will be "loopholes" and "gerrymandering" that will be abused by those in power. This is absolute nonsense. There are no "jurisdictions" or "gerrymandering" involved in a general election where the principal of one citizen one vote is upheld completely. There aren't districts, there aren't delegates, there is one general election where EVERY CITIZEN VOTES. In fact the argument of gerrymandering and loopholes ONLY comes to fruition in jurisdictional systems--like the electoral college. In summation, there is no REAL reason to keep the electoral college, only defeatist logic and fabrication of the truth.
The electoral college does not do a sufficient job at representing the opinion of America. The fact that a president could win the popular vote yet not the electoral vote makes no sense at all. If the majority of the country wants that president, that is who should be the president. States with the winner-take-all system fails even more to represent their states. If a states winning candidate has a very close majority, there is still a big minority that is not being represented. No matter if the state wins by 51% or 90%, that candidate will still get all the votes from that state. In addition, there is also the risk of having faithless electors who vote for the other candidate than what the citizens voted for. The electoral college gives too much power to its selected members. Doesn't sound like democracy to me.
I believe the electoral college should be abolished because it keeps the right of voting for the president directly from the citizens. I think it is our right that we get to vote for our own president and we are definitely a lot smarter than we were when the founding fathers started the electoral college. I see where Abby and Jack are coming from in the fact that we have ran with this as part of our government for a long time and not many people have complained. But we fought so hard for the freedom to vote, I believe that we should fight for the right for it to count towards the president too. Also, it doesn't happen often but when it does and the electoral college votes something differently than we do, I think that is so wrong. They are supposed to be there to represent us. So with that they should vote how we do. The electoral college has caused way too many issues and it is time for us to be able to directly vote for our president, I believe we are capable of that.
I believe we should keep the Electoral College for many reasons. First of all, the Electoral College makes majorities that would not exist in the popular vote and it amplifies majorities that would be very close. The Electoral College also orients elections around the states. The states are an important part of our system; anything that draws public attention to the states is valuable. Presidential elections remind Americans that states are a component part of our federal system. It is an excellent example of federalism. Another positive component of the Electoral College is that is has led to the election of great leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson that have positively influenced our country. The Electoral College has worked for 200 years keeping the United States of America under solid control and has kept it free of tyranny and dictatorship.
The electoral college definitely should be abolished in today's society. It essentially inhibits the people's ability to select the president--their main leader--and allows for an electoral victory to trump a popular victory. As a result of both the winner take all rule as well as the faithless elector, it is very possible that the electoral college won't be aligned with the feelings of the American people. This was evidenced several times in US history, most notably in the 2000 elections with Bush v. Gore. The American people voted one way, but the electoral college voted another way. In today's age, many of the things that the founders feared, like communication problems and illiterate masses are no longer present in today's society. Thus, the electoral college is a long outdated method for voting for president and more importantly is broken because the American people do not truly have the option to directly select their country's leader.
The Electoral College should be kept in place for a number of reasons, mainly because it ensures that the smaller states are represented even though their population size is much smaller than larger states, who would over shadow the minorities, potentially even causing candidates to skip over the smaller states entirely. The Electoral College poses no real threat it produces very fair elections and is only being put under scrutiny a few times. Additionally, abolishing the Electoral College would require a amendment needing a 2/3 majority vote by Congress and a 3/4 majority vote by the states making it incredibly difficult almost impossible. Although there are some problems with the Electoral College it has been working effectively and efficiently for over 200 years it is unnecessary and a waste of time to change it when there is no reason for our election process to be transformed and turned around.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because it were, there would be tremendous chaos throughout the country. The Electoral College orients elections around states instead of giving Congress the full decision on who the president should be. Showing the country that they let states have a say in whether who should be president shows how the federal Gov. and states share power(federalism). It also ensures that smaller states are represented based on population and even though the population might be low, the state is still represented. Another reason to keep the Electoral College is that it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish it and the congress needs a 2/3 vote and the states need a 3/4 majority which is almost impossible and is a quite difficult task to make most states and congress of the majority.
The Electoral College should not be abolished. Currently, it has Pro's and Con's, but the con's can be addressed and changed so that the electoral college is accurate and balanced. An example of the strengths of the Electoral College is that it provides stability between the electing powers of large states and small states. A downside to it, though, is that it suppresses third parties heavily. The method of electing a president and vice president should be revised so that the electoral college votes proportionally to the votes received by each candidate in a state. In other words, get rid of the "winner-take-all" system, and this will allow third parties to gain at least a few votes, and it will ultimately be a more accurate representation of how the American population votes.
We should start looking towards abolishing the Electoral College. This can not happen overnight, however, in time it could be abolished. Congress needs to obviously come up with another, more effective solution. It would need to equally represent states based on population but also give the people direct voting rights instead of indirect democracy, the way it is in the Electoral College. Yes, the Electoral College ensures that not one state has too much power, but that can be a factor in a new system also. Taking the majority of the regulations in the Electoral College and tweaking the flaws could work out greatly. The Electoral College has a major flaw in the way it handles ties. In a tie situation the House decides who is President and Vice President and they can come from different political parties which can cause problems. A President and Vice President from different political parties can cause major disputes in Congress and other parts of governments causing no progress to be done. I believe there also needs to be more of a direct democracy in the way that the President, Vice President, and other parts of government are elected, so a new system could fix that.
The United States should keep the electoral college as the way in which the president is elected, but there should be some minor changes made. Mainly, territories should be awarded the ability to vote in Presidential elections because they are US citizens, and therefore should have electoral college votes. United States citizens that move to those territories should also be able to vote. Also, the electoral votes should be awarded proportionately to the votes of the state in order to allow for a more accurate representation of the general public. Although this could result in no one candidate getting a majority, it it the best way to ensure all parts of the United states are equally represented despite population differences.
A blazing contradiction of the democratic nature boasted by American politics, the impractical procedures of the electoral college must be abolished. In his Gettysburg adress, Lincoln attests that the union is a 'government of the people, by the people, for the people'. If this were to be true, the result of the presidential election must reflect the opinion of the populous. Despite its intentions, the electoral college has three times produced a non-popular president. To make matters worse, CGP Grey mathematically demonstrates the ability to win the presidency with only 21.91% of the popular vote, a clear violation of public rights. The distribution of votes in itself is also incredibly flawed. The distribution of a minimum amount of votes always ensures that the population is misappropriated. According to the electoral college, a state with a smaller population than another state will receive more voting power than the larger state simply because they are both allotted three votes. The argument that the electoral college forces the candidates to disperse their campaign direction is simply untrue as statistics have constantly reported a fixation on swing states. Even at its base, the college's prime purpose to get around communication limitations has no place in such a technologically-different state of society. Simply put, the electoral college's outdated purpose and undemocratic methods have no place functioning in present-day America.
The Electoral College should be abolished. This is because, with the Electoral College, it is possible for a candidate to win more electoral votes while having won less votes from American citizens overall. Meaning that, even if the majority of American citizens vote for one candidate, another candidate can still win an election, therefore becoming the next president. So ultimately, due to the fact that the Electoral College can make the wrong candidate president, it should be abolished.
I believe that we should not have an electoral college when electing our president. Although the concern is that one faction would dominate without the college, the overall outcome due to this process has a negative effect on how our president is elected. One negative thing about this middle man between the people and the president is that citizens don’t vote for the president themselves. Even though one person might vote for a Republican candidate, if the majority votes of the state go to the Democratic candidate then those votes don’t matter. Even if the state is 51% Democratic and 49% Republican, 100% goes to the Democratic candidate. Due to this concept, if a candidate wins the most votes though out the entire nation, they still may not become president unless they win the majority votes for each state, especially the large ones. Another reason why the electoral college is unbeneficial is because the representatives for each state don’t actually have to vote for how the majority of the state votes. If the Democratic candidate wins the majority vote in the state of Wyoming, the representatives for that state may choose to elect the Republican candidate instead. The number of members in the electoral college is different for each state as well, which makes it unfair to other states. For example, Rhode Island is so small that it has an advantage because we give it more representation than it should technically have which is unfair to California even though it is a larger state. In conclusion, if everyone in the country could vote for who they wanted and there vote counted directly toward the election, I believe more people would vote because it would have more significance, and the president most favored by the people would win. If a candidate is voted for individually more times than the other, than they should be the president of the United States because more people want that man in office, running the country.
The United States should abolish the Electoral College for several reasons: it is an outdated system, it does not properly represent the population, and there is room for manipulation in representation. Just as James, Helen, and several others have explained, while many of the arguments at the time of the founding fathers were completely valid when implementing the Electoral College, in modern society these are practically obsolete. First, it was logical to have this sort of system in place when the fastest method transporting information was through the Pony Express, which was also not the safest trip to make and did not ensure said information would even reach its destination. However, as technology has evolved not only does practically anyone in the United States have access to these devices, which are far more safer and faster than horse riding, but despite Kristen's concerns about it still taking more time, this technology, (which is sure to continue to improve as the years go on), also makes it easier to count up the number of votes on a larger scale. Additionally, with the severely uneducated masses of the United States of old, there was some sense in the nobles wanting to entrust the decision of who should lead in the hands of the educated - there are countries even today that still have this issue and as a result are broken. This leads to how this system does not properly represent the population. The United States is not like these largely uneducated countries: access to accurate and updated information is readily available and the majority of the population has had some for of education: it is only logical that their say should impact the overall outcome. Additionally, Grace's comment about how people would simply vote for people of their own state is not entirely relevant, as people today still do so but since there are only two candidates running at a time it does not necessarily effect the outcome to an extreme and the effects it does cause?...well does it not make sense to favor someone who personally understands the very place you live in? Despite this, the power is ultimately in the hands of a small number of people, a group of “nobles,” who do not necessarily understand the needs and desires of the people. Because the Electoral College is actually not forced to vote for the candidate they are “supposed to” in 24 states, which is in a way manipulating the system, and even if they do properly vote to mirror that of those who voted for them, a candidate can still win the presidential election without actually consenting with the majority of the nation. (On a side note, as Mr. Chazen explained in class today, not only was this power to manipulate possible with the Electoral College, it is the entire basis of its existence. If one were to argue that protecting the common man from his or her own's decision is still necessary with the Electoral College that is implemented today, then that would still be an illogical statement as it is illegal to do so in over half of the states, once again making this useless implementation in modern society even more obsolete). Ultimately, the Electoral College may have had some reason in the early years of the United States, but just like how much of the nation has evolved since then, it is only logical that such a crucial system, which directly effects the course of this country, would adapt with the times.
The the electoral college should definitely be abolished because it is outdated and there is definitely a lot of room for things to go in the wrong direction. There are too many chances for electors to be faithless or for them to do what they're expected, but ending up with a tie between the two+ candidates, or with just nobody getting 270 votes, therefore leaving it up to the House of Representatives to choose a president for the good of the United States, but this can often have very different results than those of the popular vote. With the electoral college, there is little doubt that your state's electors will vote how you want them to overall as a state, but they don't always have to. It's outdated in that when the framers created it, it was to appease the general mistrust of the public by the federalists, so they would be voting, but not directly for the president, so the electoral college helped to make it fewer random "stupid" citizens voting for the future of the entire country. Today, almost everybody in the United States that can and would vote actually understands the government at least to the point of a high school government class, such as this one, and are literate, much smarter than the average citizen when the Constitution was written. I agree with Abby that it does have advantages, such as the voting is pretty even, but the bad outweighs the good. It will be hard to come up with a system that incorporates the good of the electoral college system and fix the problems of it as well, but there has got to be a problem, and I'm sure that if the country thinks about it for long enough, we will come up with a better alternative, such as direct elections by district or something like that, to even out the influence of the larger states.
The Electoral College should be abolished because it is outdated and not necessary. The Electoral College was originally created because the framers did not believe that the American people were educated enough to choose a president. Today people are more educated and are capable of deciding on a president. Of course, there will always be uninvolved people in the world who probably should not be voting for the president but they still get a vote because they are American citizens. The Electoral College is unnecessary because people should have all the power to decide the president. One person, one vote. With the Electoral College, candidates for president will only spend their time going around to states with a larger population and not pay attention to smaller states. They should be focused on the nation as a whole and not on specific states. Also, people in larger states can have less power than people in smaller states because the amount of electoral votes is dependant on how many representatives there are in Congress per state. Every state has at least three members in Congress so technically they can have more electoral votes than they really deserve giving the residents of smaller states more power in their vote. Parties would then have to advertise more throughout the nation and spread advertising out to all of the states, not just a few. We are also voting for a national president so we should not be voting with our state but we should be voting as a country. Another reason we should abolish the Electoral College is that a candidate who wins the popular vote can still lose the election if the other candidate gets more electoral votes. This has happened three times in history and it is bound to happen again as long as we still have the Electoral College. The people should be making the direct decision on who the president is and not the electors. The electors aren’t even required in the Constitution to vote for who they tell the people they will vote for. They can go against the people to help decide who the president will be which is not fair or ethical. Thus, the electoral college is not necessary because it does not equally give each person one vote, people from smaller states have more power, and because a candidate who wins the popular vote won’t become president if they don’t get all the electoral votes too. We should not have the Electoral College but instead just have popular vote to fairly represent the people.
Today in the 21st century, I see no reason for there to be an Electoral College. With the United States having a literacy rate of 99% and every person being required to attend school until they are 16, on average, Americans as a whole are more educated then they were when the founders created the electoral college. Also, in the past 100 or so years, technology has greatly improved, and as a result, so has communications. This means that the two issues for having the Electoral College, lack of communication and people not being educated, are virtually nonexistent. I say that Americans can handle having a popular vote to decide the president. The Electoral College should be abolished.
Although many people have argued that the Electoral College should be kept because it gives advantages to small states, it should actually be abolished for that very reason. As it stands, small states have more electoral votes per capita than large states, giving their citizens a disproportionately large voice. Two votes should not have different levels of influence just because they are cast by people from different locations. The Electoral College diminishes the value of votes from citizens of large states, undermining the concept of equality in voting.
While it seems to take power away from the people to continue having an electoral college, an electoral college actually puts power back into the hands of the states. The winner take all system forces the ruling majority in each state to be recognized significantly. A state whose majority votes liberal will be recognized as a state that takes its own majority as supreme and supports a liberal candidate (same with any other party). Although the minority voters will feel as if their votes are not being taken into consideration, as a resident of the state, it is not that their vote does not matter but rather the collective recognition of the majority desire as a state and the resulting state's electoral votes contribute as one mass of votes. If majority rules is going to be the thesis of democracy then the decision is finite and the state stands by its majority regardless.
The Electoral College should be kept because it has served and continues to serve as the most efficient and effective method of electing the president without sacrificing too much democracy and the safety of the nation. The Electoral College has effectively selected the president for over 200 years, nearly 250. This system has kept a president in power that’s reasonably fair and isn’t a dictator or too much of a nut case. Further, these ideas were carefully constructed and planned with much time and by many geniuses of the 18th century: Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin to name a few.The foresight and genuineness of these men has survived through the constitution and has helped our nation function as we adhere to the values our founding fathers created. Further, this form of election is very efficient: only 538 votes decide the president rather than many million that would demand recounts and involve a lot of error. Moreover, changing the Electoral College to direct popular consent would involve changes of the organization of election and involve extra work and money, something our country need to spend less of. Additionally, the Electoral College doesn't sacrifice democracy: it filters it so that electors represent the people while making decisions according to the wisdom and experience. Of course this has led to some differences in popular vote and electoral vote, but this is the way the framers intended it. Besides that, electors normally follow the people in the state anyway. Further, the amounts of electors states get reflect their population without bigger states having an unjust advantage over small ones. Moreover, the Electoral College keeps a majority faction among the people from seizing control of the nation. Overall, the Electoral College has served that nation well and protects it from factions and keeps democracy justly balanced and intact.
The Electoral College was once a fundamental part of the American political process, today however, it is simply an outdated and pointless way of electing the President. While it would be hard to abolish the College, as it is a part of the Constitution and would require an amendment, it should be done. I agree it was the best system of electing the president when the Framers added it into the Constitution, however nowadays their rational is invalid. The College was invaluable in the past, protecting ill-educated Americans from electing the candidate that is best for the country as well as the fact that it was also the quickest and most efficient way to get the election done. Today technology gives us, as the first blend space video revealed, the ability to send messages from Missouri to California in 0.012 seconds whereas the same journey on horseback would take a full week. Because American literacy and education levels have increased dramatically while the speed of sending information from place to place has decreased equally rapidly, we no longer need the Electoral College. Furthermore, the College is supposed to vote the way the people vote in the popular election, and in 26 states the electors have no choice but to vote as the people in their state did. In fact, only 73 times since the ratification of the Constitution has an elector voted for a candidate that did not win the popular election. Because the electors vote the way of the popular election in almost every example, the electoral college is shown as a useless middleman that hinders the American democratic process. Since Americans are no longer the illiterate, uneducated people of the past, since messages and information no longer travel at the pace of a snail, and since the College simply votes the same way as the popular election and is an insult to the democratic system of government our country strives for, the Electoral College should be considered useless and should be abolished.
The U.S definitely abolish the Electoral College. Back then, a large portion of the population was illiterate so they had little knowledge of politics. Therefore the Electoral College was created. Now, the general public has a much larger understanding of politics so they don't need to elect electors in order to choose for them. The system of the Electoral College has many flaws; the biggest one is that the president who is elected may not win the popular vote. This is a problem because it does not accurately represent the desires of the nation. Also, the act of indirectly voting for the president is an issue because electors that people vote for are not forced to vote for the voters' desires or vote for the candidate that they promise to represent. This isn't fair to the people because it causes one person's opinion to inaccurately reflect the opinion of the majority.
The Electoral College cannot evolve and adapt to today’s society, therefore it is and will continue to be outdated. For this reason, without a doubt should the Electoral College be abolished. A nation such as ours cannot continue to allow representatives to take over an entire state with about 49% of those people do not believe in that representatives ideals. However we cannot have a Proportional electoral vote because that will make it even harder to achieve those 270 electoral votes. If 270 votes are not achieved, then the vote goes to the House. This brings me to my second reason which is we cannot trust the House of Representatives with vote of the President. This is because the House is already gerrymandered to an infinite number that skews elections towards one side. Therefore the votes of the House will not be the vote of the people and instead benefit that one party. My final point is that the basis of the United States is that everyone has a voice and all those voices are equal. Currently, the Electoral College gives more power to those whom are of higher status (super electors) and those “select few” who vote FOR us. Not only is this taking power away from the people, but also poses the risk for faithless electors to abuse the system and stray away from the people. The ONLY way to get out of the pandemic is by establishing a direct democracy, or a TRUE democracy. Equality will be established and it will be harder for the representatives to corrupt the process without it going to the house. A direct election will be the chance for us to become the sovereign nation that we’ve tried to establish.
There is a danger in treating the constitution as if it was religious text. The "founding fathers" were just people, and no one knew that more than they did. Here is a quote from Thomas Jefferson to illustrate my point: "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." Saying we should keep a law or policy "because it works" is not how democracy is supposed to work. What happens in our government is our prerogative. One way to look at government is that every time a new law is passed, we give up a little freedom. Every opportunity we have to gain power in our government for the people is not an opportunity to be missed. We already directly elect senators (a change from the original constitution) and the country wasn't thrown into chaos. The direct election is brutally fair. It may not give as much power to small states, but it is, exactly, what the people want. This is the most democratic method for the most powerful position in the government.
The United State should keep the Electoral College. It should stay in place because the Electoral College is an example of indirect democracy, as well as federalism, by giving the states more involvement in the election of the federal president. The way the Electoral College is able to give the states the power to elect their president is by allowing the popular vote to decide which candidate gets the vote for that state. This is not a direct count of the citizen’s view, but it decreases the possibility of larger bodies of people voting for a single candidate, such as all the poor voting for a particular democrat. This makes sure that factions cannot take over, avoiding an unfair advantage.
I believe that the Electoral College, although it is not perfect, keeps a stable process for electing the presidents of the United States. Some may say that the process of going through electors to get new presidents is unfair, because the electors could change their votes last minute. I agree in this aspect, because I believe an elector should vote for what is best for the country, rather than for the individual. However, the Elevtoral College is a stable process that helps our voting process run smoothly. It also opens doors for minority groups and new ideas. I think that the Electoral College should maybe be revised, or fixed to improve more recent issues in the voting process, however without it I believe voting would be very hard and complicated. I agree with the basis of the Electoral College, however it needs to be improved and updated.
I agree with James and Helen, the electoral college should be abolished in favor of a more direct method, either straight direct elections or proportional electoral votes. Candidates are given too many electoral votes due to the "winner-take-all" method we use now. I also lean more towards direct elections than proportional electoral voting because if 270 electoral votes are not reached under the proportional system the decision goes to the House (and Senate for VP), which again takes power out of the hands of the people.
The United States should keep its electoral college because it helps unify the country and stability of the nation. The College forces candidates to distribute their campaign money and time across the whole nation in order to win supporters. Candidates cannot spend all their time in one populated area and hope to win all the popular votes because they would only win the electoral votes for the states. So even if all the people in the state voted for one person, they still would only have the electors votes. For example, if all the popular votes of Missouri were in favor of one person, they would have about six million, but only 11 of 538 electoral votes. Candidates are forced to win support from many states and regions which means that the candidates have to set policies and serve to what the people need from all across the country. Thus, creating a more nation with the popular support distributed, resulting in national unity. Also, the Electoral College encourages a two-party system. Third parties have an extremely low chance of winning an election with the electoral college so they usually join one of the major two parties. The smaller, third parties make compromises to their sometimes radical views.This creates two, large parties that hold a diverse set of policies and beliefs which best covers the beliefs of the citizens. Citizens usually fall in one of these two parties allowing for the government to better serve the needs of the people. The college also protects the United States from minor parties joining together and forming one large party and electing a candidate which best represented the party’s beliefs which were usually radical.
The Electoral College should still be in place with a couple changes. It is beneficial to have an electoral college to ensure we actually elect a president for office. If the direct election chose the president, minority candidates could steal votes and cause chaos among the system. The Electoral College sways some people to vote for the major parties instead of minority candidates because their vote will make more if an impact in the Electoral College’s decision if it’s with a majority party. It is important to focus on the two major parties because that’s what most Americans want for this country. One change that should be made is that electors have to vote based on their states wishes. The “faithless elector” should not be able to exist because the majority in that state would be surely angry. The majority vote from the people in a certain state should then give all its electoral votes to that majority party. This gives the people more power instead of having it all rest in elector’s hands. Currently the people have little power in general elections because every time they pass their power and votes onto electors and hope the electors vote how they’re supposed to. The people should have a little more power than they have currently. Most presidents win the electoral votes as well as the general population vote. There are only 3 exceptions to this, so the Electoral College usually does its job in electing the more favored candidate. This shows the Electoral College does a fine job and there’s no need to abolish it but simply make a change or two.
The electoral college, though flawed, is a stable system of voting. It should not be completely destroyed but may be altered. It may be complex but a complex system is necessary to properly represent a diverse population. Electors are separated by state which makes it difficult for larger interest groups to band together and vote over other interest groups. The number or electors is based off of population which is practical and fair. And even though the people do not directly vote for the president, they still have most of the say in who wins. Also, the backup plans in case of a tie has Congress voting on the president and vice president which creates a balance between federal and state power. All in all, the electoral college has worked effectively for years and should continue to be implemented.
I believe that since the electoral college has such a strong foundation in the American government, it should continue to be practiced an not be abolished. Also, the electoral college allows the process of electing a new president to be civilized and not chaotic. If the US was a direct democracy in which every citizen voted and every voted counted, the process would be crazy and not accurate. With this system, the process is kept clean with a set number of people voting for what their state majority wants.
The Electoral College should be abolished from the process of electing a president for the United States. Not only does the system faulty by not binding the electors to vote for the candidate with the popular vote in the state, the candidate who wins the majority votes of a state, gets all the votes of the state. Furthermore, it is also outdated and reduces the voices of the masses--demographical groups that should definitely be represented. When the framers of the Constitution designed Electoral college, they were trying to create a system in which the majority faction, the poor people, do not monopolize the vote. Nowadays, with considerably increased equality of a citizen’s vote, the masses are the groups that should be represented. Next, they also added in the rules that the elector was not bound to represent the voting turnout of the state. If the elector is not bound to that, the President can be someone that the majority citizens of the United States did not vote for. Furthermore the winner-takes-all rule is very faulty because it prevents third party candidates from ever winning a state's electoral votes, and does not accurately represent the citizens' choice. In conclusion, the Electoral College system should not only be abolished because of its outdatedness, but also because of its potentially inaccurate representation of the American people.
So I started off thinking the Electoral College was a good system but after today's lecture, it seems to be for the best if we change it slightly. I think the Electoral College should still be the position but the candidates should not have a "Winner-Takes-All" benefit. To give the people more power and to make the running more fair for all candidates, such as 3rd party candidates, we should split up the electoral votes based on proportion the candidate won in that state.
The electoral college, or some form of it, should be kept as our method of choosing our president. Despite some flaws, the electoral college provides a balance of power between states when deciding who will govern our nation. Without the electoral college, the 5 or so largest states would have all the power when choosing our government, and presidents would only have to campaign in large population centers. The electoral college prevents tensions between large and small states, and more importantly, due to electors serving as representatives, it prevents factions from controlling who serves in our oval office. So despite its shortcomings, the electoral college is a necessary evil, and needs to remain in place until a better system is created.
The electoral college should be kept so that all states are given a voice and that power and campaigning is not concentrated in the most populous regions of the United States. Without the electoral college, both incumbent presidents and other candidates would give voter-heavy areas an unfair amount of attention and consideration, and much of the country would be disregarded by the executive branch. With the electoral college, even though candidates still focus on the larger states, at least the smaller states are not completely disregarded. However, I agree with Lily that territories need to be able to vote. The US government, claiming to be democratic, cannot deny some of the people they govern (even if they're not part of a state) the right to vote on who is making decisions for them. Proportional electoral voting is also a good idea so that the people's wishes are more accurately represented, while still preserving the safeguard for the smaller states.
American citizens live in a democracy, all about equality. A person should receive equal representation when voting, in America we do not, it depends on the population of the state you live in. In the Electoral College, representation depends on the population as a state, so “states vote” not people (Baker and Raskin). Every vote should count as a person, and they all should match. Majority ruling and voting with the Popular Vote will make votes equitable.In the past, people have come to America to receive rights, and treatment that is equal. Americans should have their thoughts heard. 65% of average Americans would prefer Popular Vote (Baker and Raskin). Majority should rule. States have passed the law, such as Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington (Fadem et al.). This law has passed their full state government. If so many people prefer the popular vote and it has been through state governments, the Electoral College should not continue.Ultimately, using the Popular Vote to elect the President and Vice President, and eliminating the Electoral College would be a positive change to the constitution. Votes will have equal weight and candidates will have less competition. The Electoral College’s intentions do not apply today. All votes should weigh equal amounts. In most states the candidate with the most votes receives all of the state's electoral votes. Some states have a history of consistently voting Republican or consistently voting Democrat. Candidates pay less attention to states with clear favorites and more attention to large states with no clear favorite.
The Electoral College should remain in action due to the positive effects it creates, the fact that it orients elections around states and the fact that it is the most equitable compromise between popular vote and Congressional vote. As stated by Dan Lowenstein, the Electoral College tends to make majorities that would cease to exist in the popular vote and amplifies the majorities that would be very close. This allows for Presidents to become elected regardless if they received the majority of the popular votes. Furthermore, the Electoral College orients elections around the states. In other words, although it may not appear so, the states and the citizens in those states have a greater impact on the outcome of the presidential election than the federal government does. In this system, the political parties in the state government dictate which electors represent their party based on party loyalty, and the citizens of those states decide which of those electors votes for the president. Lastly, the Electoral College is the fairest compromise between presidential elections by popular votes and presidential elections by Congressional vote. So, although it may seem more democratic to have presidential elections by means of popular vote, the Electoral College was created as an appeasement of those people on opposite sides of the spectrum. There is no possible way to act in favor of everyone, so member of both sides are forced to meet in the middle and create a system that has benefits to both sides, which was exactly what the Framers did at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The Electoral College should be abolished because it is an outdated system that has the potential to undermine what the citizens actually want. The Electoral College was established when framing the Constitution because at the time, much of America was uneducated and illiterate, which is no longer the case. Today, Americans are met with a plethora resources including education and fast-traveling news and media that make them capable of choosing their leaders for themselves without a middleman. Furthermore, the Electoral College weakens the strengths of the voters' voices. Most states practice a winner takes all system. If a candidate wins 51% of the popular vote, all of the state's electors vote for that candidate. This leaves 49% of the people totally unaccounted for, making it unfair. The Electoral College is also unfair because it can allow for a candidate to lose the popular vote, but still earn a seat in office because of the electoral vote. America's leaders need to be a reflection of what America actually wants, not of what the Electoral College wants. The best way to achieve this is via a direct vote, something perfectly achievable and reasonable in a time where people are more aware of the nation's politics and votes can be easily counted electronically.
No matter how effective the Electoral college is when it comes to dealing with the issues in Congress during an election (which it isn't very). The harms of an electoral college far outweigh any potential benefits. This applies not only on a nationwide basis as a president could be elected with only 22 percent of the popular vote, but across every state as well as FPTP style politics seems to make it so that unlikely candidates don't even get a fraction of a chance. Another damn should be given to the millions of Americans who identify as a member of a third party who now have a voice if this ineffective pile of garbage is tossed. BUT WHAT HO! you say, isn't this what James Madison envisioned in order to combat the tyranny of the majority? Why should we toss away such a process? Well perhaps the 26 states that pretty much allow this majority to run rampant anyway should be considered. Despite Madison's warnings we still haven't seen this supposed tyranny anyways. In fact by abolishing the electoral college there may be a smaller chance of having a tyranny as people split into more and more independent parties which further promotes Madison's ideals. tl;dr anyone who supports the Electoral college is rek't
The Electoral College, with out any doubt, should be abolished for many reasons. First, this idea was originally made for fair voting back in the day, and to fully understand that, we have to know that the framers created the Electoral College during the time of the constitution. Meaning it was created when the US only had 13 states. These states were spread over a wide geographical region. Some of the states were large and others were small, so there was some concern about the balance of power between the large and small states. Clearly, if the presidential elections were based only on the popular vote, then the larger states would always have the advantage. Another reason why it was made, is because of the people living in the states back then. Many of the people were illiterate, meaning they weren't the kind of people to have sufficient information to make wise decisions. Now, we have media like the internet, news, radio, etc. that give us more knowledge of who we are voting for. Also I think the winter takes all thing is very unfair because even if a candidate loses by 2% , the other candidate gets all the votes whether the people like it or not. The Electoral College system was designed with good intentions, based on a country that, at the time, was much different from America today, and I believe that it had out dated its efficiency for the 21st century.
I agree with Abby Allgeyer entirely. Why change something that we have used throughly in the history of the United States of America. Abolishing a system that has made it easier to create majorities for presidential elections is completely unnecessary and should not be focused so much into. Additionally, I agree with John Crowley's statement about how "if the Electoral College was never added to the Constitution, states with more population would have much more power on the selection of presidents". This inequality between states would then bring back debates and disputes about small states and their power. Overall, with the Electoral College, small states are represented much more respectfully and majorities are easier to draw.
My thought on abolishing the electoral college is that, yes we should get rid of the electoral college. First, we should abolish the electoral college because the system is considered a "in-direct democracy", in which we elect our president, even though United States is a democracy, so why shouldn't people have the right to elect their own president, instead of having the electors choose it for them, so essentially why have other people make decisions for the people when the people should have the right to make their own decisions. Second, the next reason why we should abolish the electoral college is because of the winner take all system. When states are toss up states when have the electoral college is makes them not decisive at all, thus it distorts campaigns because each presidential nominee would have to go to each of these toss up states, and not going to any other parts of the country, and no candidate has visit all 50 states, therefore if we eliminated it we would see more national campaigns. Third, that the electors to always keep their pledge in who their vote will go to in the election, which these are faithless electors, why should we trust someone to vote for a certain candidate and then vote for another one, in turn we should have the president elected by populous votes because in the electoral college majority in one state takes all votes, expect Nebraska and Maine, but why shouldn't the president be elect that way, a national vote and whoever gets more populous votes should be the next president of the United States.
The electoral college should be kept the way in which we choose our president. Despite its flaws, the electoral college gives the general election a balance of power between states. Without the electoral college, lesser population states will get less of a say in the choice of our president, a person who is to represent the "entire" nation. The electoral college prevents turmoil between states of large populations vs. those of small populations such as Texas again New Hampshire. Despite the electoral colleges flaws, the electoral college is necessary to keep balance between states and with representation.
Although the Electoral College is a key part of federalism, allowing for an easy compromise between large states and small states, there are too many reasons in favor of abolishing the Electoral College for it to remain a part of the United States’ government. For starters, one of the main purposes of it when it was originally created was to ensure that the people electing the president were well informed about the candidates running. At the time of the Electoral College’s creation, early on in the history of the United States, it was hard for common people to stay up to date on elections due to the lack of technology at that time. Because of the technology that America has today, this is no longer a problem; therefore, the Electoral College no longer serves its originally intended purpose. In addition to this, the Electoral College is also rather flawed. It gives more weight to votes cast in small states, and people who disagree with the majority of their state are not represented. Its “winner-take-all” system allows whoever wins the state votes, even if it was only by a little over 50%, to get all of that state’s electoral votes. Along with this, the Electoral College makes it possible for a president who did not win the popular vote, or who does not have support from the majority of voters, to be elected. This can happen as the result of faithless electors, who are members of the Electoral College who do not vote for the presidential or vice presidential candidate that they pledged to their state that they would vote for. All of these reasons in favor of abolishing the Electoral College outweigh the reasons to keep it, proving that it would be more beneficial to get rid of the Electoral College.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because the Electoral College does exactly what it was created for and is still effective to this day with other advantages. First, the Electoral College was created so that both the federal government and the state governments were involved in the process of electing the president. Also it was created to ensure that the masses that do not know anything about politics do not sway the votes for president. If the Electoral College did not exist, the popular votes could be extremely close and then every presidential election would be ineffectively choosing a president. Today, all but two states have the winner-take-all system and it is effective because when a candidate wins the popular vote in the state, they automatically get the votes of the Electoral College for the state. This system shows the view of the majority in the state and ensures that the electors vote with the view of the public in mind. This may make it hard for third party systems, however, the chances of the third party winning is extremely small. However the likeliness of a third party winning a presidential election is very small, and it doesn't depend on what kind of voting system the U.S. has. Lastly, to abolish the Electoral College, the Senate would first have to ratify an amendment with a 2/3 majority and then ¾ of states would also have to agree to ratify it. Because these majorities are hard to get, the electoral college should just stick to what it has been doing because it does what it needs to do: fairly represent the states.
The Electoral College should be abolished as it may deviate the results of an election from he intention of the people and hinder the election process as a whole. This however does not mean a direct election should be instituted in place of it. The original intent for its establishment has long been defeated by the accessibility of information in today's society, which eliminates the need for the power of a secondary established representation in the election process. The winner take all system as a result of restrictions placed upon the final ruling of this institution, more commonly known as the Electoral College, can and has been proven to defeat the purpose of accurate representation of the population of the US in american politics, by establishing totalist principles as loopholes serving only to aid misrepresentation if needed. The argument for its upstanding longevity is hardly any reason for keepsake if the college no longer proves to be an accurate reflection of the general ideals.
The Electoral College should be abolished. The only reason the Electoral College was created is because Federalists had a distrust with the common people because they were thought to be illeterate and unintelligent. This is not the case anymore today. One major issue of the Electoral College is the fact that a candidate could win the "popular vote" and still not become President. This is a problem because it does not represent's the public's desires for a president. Not to mention that a super delegate of faithless elector could not vote the way the public wants them to swing. Before taking AP government, I thought the president was determined by the citizens and what their votes. After this lesson, I have come to realize it is a little more complicated and corupt than that.
I agree with Abby that the Electoral College should stay. Because the United States is already using the Electoral College to help determine the president on Election Day, it should just be kept. It would take a lot of effort to remove or change the Electoral College because it would require a Constitutional amendment. This means there would need to be a 2/3 majority in the Congress and 3/4 majority in the States to approve and ratify the amendment, respectively. The election only occurs every 4 years, making it not a primary issue within the people. Also, there isn’t always a clear majority within the states when voting for the president, so the Electoral College helps exaggerate the majority by siding to one party during the November elections. Even though there is the possibility that a candidate may become president even if they don’t win the popular vote, there’s a very slim chance of that happening. In history it’s only happened 4 times out the 56 elections. With the Electoral College presidential candidates can also focus their campaigns on toss up states who don’t clearly have a decision on a party. As a result of this, voters in these states will focus on the campaign because their votes will be affecting the final outcome of the electoral votes. The Electoral College also helps to stabilize the government by contributing to a two-party system. Also, it is important to include the states through the Electoral College because this reinforces federalism in the United States. The state legislatures have the power to choose the future president and vice president. Overall, having the Electoral College keeps the election process simple and organized.
I agree with Abby and Clara. We should most definitely keep the Electoral College. But i believe that one day it could be abolished, just not now. The common populace is still not ready for the choice of president. Just as the Federalists believe, even in the present day, most people don't know much about politics. They have no idea who they're voting for, who to vote for, and why. The Electoral College has to stay in place until the people can get better educated in politics and not need the electoral college in place. Although this completely undermines democracy it's necessary for the future of the country.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because it has proven to be an efficient and effective way to elect our president. The college was originally created in order to keep large states from having all of the power. In our country today, this is still a relevant worry. Some states have massive populations, and some states have much smaller populations. The college ensures that all citizens have an equal say in who the next president should be. Without the college, the larger, more populous states would have a clear advantage over the smaller states. Throughout our country’s history, this system has worked well and has kept major factions, and states from taking all of the power. In addition, the college upholds the founders desire for an indirect democracy. The college ensures that the citizens do not have too much power in electing the president. Electors cast votes for the actual president instead of citizens, resulting in the indirect election of the president. Also, the electoral college makes majorities. You have to have 270 electoral votes to win an election and become president. If you have any less, or if the vote is tied, the House of Representatives would select the president, and the Senate would select the vice president. If we based presidency off just the popular vote, the candidate with the most votes would win, even if they did not have the majority vote. This could and would most likely anger a majority of the citizens, considering that they did not vote for this person to lead the nation. Further, abolishing the electoral college could only be done by making a constitutional amendment, which would be very difficult and time consuming. Overall, the electoral college stands to be an effective way to elect our president and therefore should not be changed or abolished.
I think that we should keep the electoral college because it balances the power during elections. It also gives the states more power because the electoral votes per state are based on population. It also prevents the use of gerrymandering because the votes come from the state as a whole as opposed to specific districts.
No we should not get rid of the electoral college. Even if it is an obstacle to complete democracy, it acts as a strong safety net for the people and gives important power to the states that keeps them involved in federal elections. I really like what Dan Lowenstein talked about with the electoral college simplifying the voting process and psychologically giving the president a “majority vote” that the people can reference and trust because they know that the individual in office is elected by the majority. By giving the power to the states’ electors, the people are also insured such that if the candidate voted on election day is found incapable for any reason, the electoral college takes its vote in December, so that a new President could be chosen. Trying to change the system would be too much work, as it would need an amendment from the constitution requiring 2/3 majority in Congress and ¾ ratification by the states. I think the Framer’s system has a positive effect as a tradition and a reminder of the way things used to work.
The electoral college should not be abolished for many reasons. One reason is that the majority of people cannot be trusted because, even today, they are mostly still uneducated and misinformed. Another reason people cannot be trusted is that we're selfish, its in human nature, some of us are less selfish than others, but no one is completely selfless. This means that people can easily be fooled into making poor decisions when voting, and it also means that people will place their interests over others'. This is one reason why democracy doesn't work, because the majority will always have the ability oppress the minorities. Thus a president elected by the majority could use his/her power to oppress his/her opponents who make up the minority. Another reason the electoral college should not be abolished is that it spreads the power out among the states and gives states with less people slightly more power than those with large populations. The fear of a president winning the electoral college without the popular vote is largely unjustified because while it can happen, it has only happened twice. Therefore the people usually get who they want anyway. The because the electors of the college can choose whoever they want they can reject poor choices by the people if that ever needed to happen. I do not believe the system is perfect as I think there are some improvements that could be made.
66 comments:
Because of its strong foundation in American history, the Electoral College system should not e abolished because it prevents political chaos and turmoil from occurring. One of the ways it does this is by giving the states more power in voting for the president. Based on population, states get electoral votes, which provides smaller states with more of a day in government. This system also maintains representation throughout the nation by directly correlating population with the number of electoral votes a state gets, creating fairness throughout the nation. The Electoral College also prevents factions in the government would "rig" the election by gerrymandering to give the majority party an advantage in which the people have no say whatsoever. So, in order to maintain the most potential of democracy, the Electoral College must stay in place
I agree with Abby on the benefits of the Electoral College because of the balance of power established for the states. For example, if the Electoral College was never added to the Constitution, states with more population would have much more power on the selection of presidents. This would mean that a candidate could win elections just by gathering votes from states that have more population. If a majority vote were practiced in America, then it would be unfair for smaller states for having a smaller population. The Electoral College fixes this problem by balancing the power of election between larger and smaller states. Other methods of voting may solve the problems of the Electoral College, but still wouldn’t work. If a vote based on districts was put in place, then gerrymandering would simply allow a party to dominate the selection of candidates. While the Electoral College may not be in the people’s best interest, it keeps other forms of loopholes from exploiting the election process.
I believe that we should abolish the Electoral College. It seems that we are getting too many problems with the Electoral College in this day and age that it is not worth keeping around. Just because our founding fathers made it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is right. The whole reason that the Electoral College was made was so that the poor and uneducated people of the United States. However today we have great public schools accessible by everyone, so the government can no longer use the excuse of an uneducated public, which was one of the reasons for the College in the first place. Also if the person that gets a majority vote, but still loses I feel that it’s not only unfair to the candidate, but to the majority of the people in the United States. When 51% of people want a presidential candidate to become president, but the guys that got 49% of the popular vote wins, it’s just a slap in the face to democracy. Also if we just did the cut and dry “whoever gets the most votes wins” we wouldn’t have all these cases like Florida, or if the election became a tie and had to go to the House of Representatives, then it would become even more unfair because each state only gets one vote. This could also lead to a further tie because there is only 50 states. Also the Senate would pick the vice president if the House had to pick the President. This could lead to a president ship with the president being a Republican and the Vice-President being a Democrat.
I believe that we should abolish the Electoral College. It seems that we are getting too many problems with the Electoral College in this day and age that it is not worth keeping around. Just because our founding fathers made it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is right. The whole reason that the Electoral College was made was so that the poor and uneducated people of the United States. However today we have great public schools accessible by everyone, so the government can no longer use the excuse of an uneducated public, which was one of the reasons for the College in the first place. Also if the person that gets a majority vote, but still loses I feel that it’s not only unfair to the candidate, but to the majority of the people in the United States. When 51% of people want a presidential candidate to become president, but the guys that got 49% of the popular vote wins, it’s just a slap in the face to democracy. Also if we just did the cut and dry “whoever gets the most votes wins” we wouldn’t have all these cases like Florida, or if the election became a tie and had to go to the House of Representatives, then it would become even more unfair because each state only gets one vote. This could also lead to a further tie because there is only 50 states. Also the Senate would pick the vice president if the House had to pick the President. This could lead to a president ship with the president being a Republican and the Vice-President being a Democrat.
The Electoral College should be abolished. It is an outdated way to vote in the President, and it has had mistaken in the past. The Electoral College gives too much of an advantage to a candidate when they barely win a majority, for example California. Also the reason the framers created the Electoral College on the first place is outdated in two ways. One, it is ridiculously slow. It used to be that the way to vote or get any message through to the government was by horseback which would take days to get to its destination. Nowadays, it takes nanoseconds to give a piece of information 1000s of miles away. So we no longer need a slow and tedious way of exchanging information. Secondly, the Electoral College was created because the framers did not trust the common people to vote for the correct candidate. This was back when the US was only 13 states with a smaller amount of people that generally knew the people running and the framers feared that they would just vote for their friend. Nowadays, the U has millions of people and a vast majority too. The people also look closer at the actual politics of the president. They are much more capable of voting for a president. Overall, the Electoral College is an old fashioned method that needs to be abolished.
Although Abby and John bring up some very valid points, the electoral college is, in essence, pointless. Originally created both as a safety net against the illiteracy of America and to streamline the election process, both of these uses have been deemed pointless by the wonders of modern technology. And now, over 200 years later, the only functions of the EC is to mildly protect minority rights and "prevent political chaos". What is not realized, though, is that while the EC may protect smaller states, it actually heavily favors the majority party. Because a winner-take-all system is present in almost all states, the minority is effectively oppressed for the sake of unity of the majority. While this may bring up issues relevant to smaller states that would not have been mentioned otherwise, in the grand scope of things this actually shuts down those issues. Politicians will spend most of their time campaigning in swing states, hoping to rack up more votes. What this means is that all of the other states, with an obvious majority party, will be ignored, and the issues important to them will be ignored. This isn't the protection of minority rights, but the selective screening of certain states and issues important to a small portion of the population. The EC system does not protect minority rights, nor prevent chaos. Rather, it transfers power to a select few people, whose votes are the only ones that matter in the scope of American politics
The United States should keep the Electoral College for several reasons. The Electoral College orients elections around the states instead of giving Congress another decision to make along with their other powers. It draws public attention to the states, and gives the states more power because the states let their electors decide for the state’s population instead of having Congress vote on the president for the entire nation as a whole. Another reason the Electoral College should stay is because if there was a national popular vote, re-counting the votes would take even longer if they had to go over votes of all of the states. The state of Florida’s re-counting of the votes took an extended amount time to figure out, so having this state’s re-counting of votes be made on a nationwide scale would take even longer to do. A huge reason why the Electoral College needs to stay is because abolishing it would take a constitutional amendment. These amendments require two-thirds of Congress’ approval and three-fourths of the states’ ratification. Such requirements are extremely hard to fulfill, especially for this proposed amendment. The controversy over the Electoral College only occurs when there is a close election and is not a huge issue most of the time, so it is not a primary issue in the government. In addition, the Electoral College maintains the federal system of representation laid out in the Constitution, because the number of electors is equal the number of senators added to the number of representatives of a state. This way, big states have no fair advantage because the small states will still have at least three electors, even with a small amount of representatives. The big states will have more electors based on their larger population, so it remains fair. Also, electors are qualified to make tough political decisions that most normal citizens cannot, and will vote more fairly. This follows the desire of the Framers to have superior people who were smarter than the common citizen to make a wiser decision on who should become president. The Electoral College encourages a two-party political system due to its winner-takes-all system of votes, and this contributes to the political stability of the nation. Since presidents have to pay closer attention to more evenly divided states to win close races, this is fairer to the system of election because candidates won’t just work to win big in their political strongholds. This makes political parties more inclusive instead of more exclusive, which is only paying attention to certain favorable parts. Also, the fact that candidates must be appealing to states all over the country instead of one supportive area ensures that the candidates are well liked over a majority of the nation.
The way the electoral college is functioning well, and there is no need to change it. Furthermore, if there was no electoral college, nothing would stop the states from each just voting for their state representatives. This would give the big states a substantial amount of power over the small states. But with the Electoral College, the big states are kept from having too much power. Even the very small states like Alaska or North Dakota get three electors because they are entitled to a representative and two senators. Another positive side to having an electoral college is that it primarily revolves around the states. Every states vote really does matter in the elections. Plus, the Electoral College creates majorities. Sometimes, presidents don’t win by a clear majority by popular vote. This could make things very complicated, however, the Electoral College is usually able to come to a majority vote so there was no extra chaos. In cases where there is a tie, the vote would go to the House of Representatives to decide the president, and the Senate would choose the Vice President. Even if this were to ever happen, the small states are still protected from the big states. No matter how many representatives there are, each state still only receives one vote.
The Electoral College has many pros and cons to its system. One good thing about the Electoral College is that it is based on the population of the state that way say a state like delaware, where the population isn't very high, doest get the same amount of votes as a state like California might have. Even with this though their are both positives and negatives about the Electoral College I think that the Electoral College isn't the best way to decide who our president should be. One of the reasons is because the candidate that has the majority of the vote doesn't always win the Electoral College. For example, say a state that has a high population like California has a very close race and one party ends up winning with a 51% majority. Well all the votes of the Electoral College go to that one party and none go to the other party. So a candidate could end up winning the popular vote of the people but they end up losing because they didn't win the Electoral College. Another reason why I think the Electoral College isn't the best is because say a candidate wins the majority vote in a specific state, the votes in the Electoral College could still go to the other candidate. They take the people’s vote into consideration but they don't have to vote for the candidate that the people voted for. So in a sense the people don't have as big as a say as they think they do, because the Electoral College can discard what the people think and go off of what they think would be best for the country. I think today the way we should elect the president should just be by the majority vote and not the Electoral College. We have the technology now today to be able to keep track of everyone's vote and the party with the most votes gets the President and Vice President of the party they represent. It is only fair for the President position to go to the candidate that got the most votes. Also it makes everyones vote have more say in the election process and not have a point system based on a state's population.
The Electoral College should, beyond a fraction of a doubt, be abolished. Arguments like "it will cause political turmoil" are, AT BEST, defeatist logic (if we can't ensure victory then why try at all) and at worst support the aristocratic machine promulgated by the Electoral College. The first argument for abolishment is TRUE democracy: if the people cannot be trusted to elect our president, why should the people be trusted to make ANY decision. The founders, although they did establish the basis of all modern democracy, also created a model so flawed that the United States doesn't promote a similar system. The only real argument the founders had was that the people where uneducated. While there may be some people who lack higher education on average the common man is far more educated now than in the 18th century, the people are ready to take the choice. The main argument brought up against those dastardly villians who reccomend keeping the evil that is the Electoral College is that there will be "loopholes" and "gerrymandering" that will be abused by those in power. This is absolute nonsense. There are no "jurisdictions" or "gerrymandering" involved in a general election where the principal of one citizen one vote is upheld completely. There aren't districts, there aren't delegates, there is one general election where EVERY CITIZEN VOTES. In fact the argument of gerrymandering and loopholes ONLY comes to fruition in jurisdictional systems--like the electoral college. In summation, there is no REAL reason to keep the electoral college, only defeatist logic and fabrication of the truth.
The electoral college does not do a sufficient job at representing the opinion of America. The fact that a president could win the popular vote yet not the electoral vote makes no sense at all. If the majority of the country wants that president, that is who should be the president. States with the winner-take-all system fails even more to represent their states. If a states winning candidate has a very close majority, there is still a big minority that is not being represented. No matter if the state wins by 51% or 90%, that candidate will still get all the votes from that state. In addition, there is also the risk of having faithless electors who vote for the other candidate than what the citizens voted for. The electoral college gives too much power to its selected members. Doesn't sound like democracy to me.
I believe the electoral college should be abolished because it keeps the right of voting for the president directly from the citizens. I think it is our right that we get to vote for our own president and we are definitely a lot smarter than we were when the founding fathers started the electoral college. I see where Abby and Jack are coming from in the fact that we have ran with this as part of our government for a long time and not many people have complained. But we fought so hard for the freedom to vote, I believe that we should fight for the right for it to count towards the president too. Also, it doesn't happen often but when it does and the electoral college votes something differently than we do, I think that is so wrong. They are supposed to be there to represent us. So with that they should vote how we do. The electoral college has caused way too many issues and it is time for us to be able to directly vote for our president, I believe we are capable of that.
I believe we should keep the Electoral College for many reasons. First of all, the Electoral College makes majorities that would not exist in the popular vote and it amplifies majorities that would be very close. The Electoral College also orients elections around the states. The states are an important part of our system; anything that draws public attention to the states is valuable. Presidential elections remind Americans that states are a component part of our federal system. It is an excellent example of federalism. Another positive component of the Electoral College is that is has led to the election of great leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson that have positively influenced our country. The Electoral College has worked for 200 years keeping the United States of America under solid control and has kept it free of tyranny and dictatorship.
The electoral college definitely should be abolished in today's society. It essentially inhibits the people's ability to select the president--their main leader--and allows for an electoral victory to trump a popular victory. As a result of both the winner take all rule as well as the faithless elector, it is very possible that the electoral college won't be aligned with the feelings of the American people. This was evidenced several times in US history, most notably in the 2000 elections with Bush v. Gore. The American people voted one way, but the electoral college voted another way. In today's age, many of the things that the founders feared, like communication problems and illiterate masses are no longer present in today's society. Thus, the electoral college is a long outdated method for voting for president and more importantly is broken because the American people do not truly have the option to directly select their country's leader.
The Electoral College should be kept in place for a number of reasons, mainly because it ensures that the smaller states are represented even though their population size is much smaller than larger states, who would over shadow the minorities, potentially even causing candidates to skip over the smaller states entirely. The Electoral College poses no real threat it produces very fair elections and is only being put under scrutiny a few times. Additionally, abolishing the Electoral College would require a amendment needing a 2/3 majority vote by Congress and a 3/4 majority vote by the states making it incredibly difficult almost impossible. Although there are some problems with the Electoral College it has been working effectively and efficiently for over 200 years it is unnecessary and a waste of time to change it when there is no reason for our election process to be transformed and turned around.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because it were, there would be tremendous chaos throughout the country. The Electoral College orients elections around states instead of giving Congress the full decision on who the president should be. Showing the country that they let states have a say in whether who should be president shows how the federal Gov. and states share power(federalism). It also ensures that smaller states are represented based on population and even though the population might be low, the state is still represented. Another reason to keep the Electoral College is that it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish it and the congress needs a 2/3 vote and the states need a 3/4 majority which is almost impossible and is a quite difficult task to make most states and congress of the majority.
The Electoral College should not be abolished. Currently, it has Pro's and Con's, but the con's can be addressed and changed so that the electoral college is accurate and balanced. An example of the strengths of the Electoral College is that it provides stability between the electing powers of large states and small states. A downside to it, though, is that it suppresses third parties heavily. The method of electing a president and vice president should be revised so that the electoral college votes proportionally to the votes received by each candidate in a state. In other words, get rid of the "winner-take-all" system, and this will allow third parties to gain at least a few votes, and it will ultimately be a more accurate representation of how the American population votes.
We should start looking towards abolishing the Electoral College. This can not happen overnight, however, in time it could be abolished. Congress needs to obviously come up with another, more effective solution. It would need to equally represent states based on population but also give the people direct voting rights instead of indirect democracy, the way it is in the Electoral College. Yes, the Electoral College ensures that not one state has too much power, but that can be a factor in a new system also. Taking the majority of the regulations in the Electoral College and tweaking the flaws could work out greatly. The Electoral College has a major flaw in the way it handles ties. In a tie situation the House decides who is President and Vice President and they can come from different political parties which can cause problems. A President and Vice President from different political parties can cause major disputes in Congress and other parts of governments causing no progress to be done. I believe there also needs to be more of a direct democracy in the way that the President, Vice President, and other parts of government are elected, so a new system could fix that.
The United States should keep the electoral college as the way in which the president is elected, but there should be some minor changes made. Mainly, territories should be awarded the ability to vote in Presidential elections because they are US citizens, and therefore should have electoral college votes. United States citizens that move to those territories should also be able to vote. Also, the electoral votes should be awarded proportionately to the votes of the state in order to allow for a more accurate representation of the general public. Although this could result in no one candidate getting a majority, it it the best way to ensure all parts of the United states are equally represented despite population differences.
A blazing contradiction of the democratic nature boasted by American politics, the impractical procedures of the electoral college must be abolished. In his Gettysburg adress, Lincoln attests that the union is a 'government of the people, by the people, for the people'. If this were to be true, the result of the presidential election must reflect the opinion of the populous. Despite its intentions, the electoral college has three times produced a non-popular president. To make matters worse, CGP Grey mathematically demonstrates the ability to win the presidency with only 21.91% of the popular vote, a clear violation of public rights. The distribution of votes in itself is also incredibly flawed. The distribution of a minimum amount of votes always ensures that the population is misappropriated. According to the electoral college, a state with a smaller population than another state will receive more voting power than the larger state simply because they are both allotted three votes. The argument that the electoral college forces the candidates to disperse their campaign direction is simply untrue as statistics have constantly reported a fixation on swing states. Even at its base, the college's prime purpose to get around communication limitations has no place in such a technologically-different state of society. Simply put, the electoral college's outdated purpose and undemocratic methods have no place functioning in present-day America.
The Electoral College should be abolished. This is because, with the Electoral College, it is possible for a candidate to win more electoral votes while having won less votes from American citizens overall. Meaning that, even if the majority of American citizens vote for one candidate, another candidate can still win an election, therefore becoming the next president. So ultimately, due to the fact that the Electoral College can make the wrong candidate president, it should be abolished.
I believe that we should not have an electoral college when electing our president. Although the concern is that one faction would dominate without the college, the overall outcome due to this process has a negative effect on how our president is elected. One negative thing about this middle man between the people and the president is that citizens don’t vote for the president themselves. Even though one person might vote for a Republican candidate, if the majority votes of the state go to the Democratic candidate then those votes don’t matter. Even if the state is 51% Democratic and 49% Republican, 100% goes to the Democratic candidate. Due to this concept, if a candidate wins the most votes though out the entire nation, they still may not become president unless they win the majority votes for each state, especially the large ones. Another reason why the electoral college is unbeneficial is because the representatives for each state don’t actually have to vote for how the majority of the state votes. If the Democratic candidate wins the majority vote in the state of Wyoming, the representatives for that state may choose to elect the Republican candidate instead. The number of members in the electoral college is different for each state as well, which makes it unfair to other states. For example, Rhode Island is so small that it has an advantage because we give it more representation than it should technically have which is unfair to California even though it is a larger state. In conclusion, if everyone in the country could vote for who they wanted and there vote counted directly toward the election, I believe more people would vote because it would have more significance, and the president most favored by the people would win. If a candidate is voted for individually more times than the other, than they should be the president of the United States because more people want that man in office, running the country.
The United States should abolish the Electoral College for several reasons: it is an outdated system, it does not properly represent the population, and there is room for manipulation in representation.
Just as James, Helen, and several others have explained, while many of the arguments at the time of the founding fathers were completely valid when implementing the Electoral College, in modern society these are practically obsolete. First, it was logical to have this sort of system in place when the fastest method transporting information was through the Pony Express, which was also not the safest trip to make and did not ensure said information would even reach its destination. However, as technology has evolved not only does practically anyone in the United States have access to these devices, which are far more safer and faster than horse riding, but despite Kristen's concerns about it still taking more time, this technology, (which is sure to continue to improve as the years go on), also makes it easier to count up the number of votes on a larger scale. Additionally, with the severely uneducated masses of the United States of old, there was some sense in the nobles wanting to entrust the decision of who should lead in the hands of the educated - there are countries even today that still have this issue and as a result are broken. This leads to how this system does not properly represent the population. The United States is not like these largely uneducated countries: access to accurate and updated information is readily available and the majority of the population has had some for of education: it is only logical that their say should impact the overall outcome. Additionally, Grace's comment about how people would simply vote for people of their own state is not entirely relevant, as people today still do so but since there are only two candidates running at a time it does not necessarily effect the outcome to an extreme and the effects it does cause?...well does it not make sense to favor someone who personally understands the very place you live in? Despite this, the power is ultimately in the hands of a small number of people, a group of “nobles,” who do not necessarily understand the needs and desires of the people. Because the Electoral College is actually not forced to vote for the candidate they are “supposed to” in 24 states, which is in a way manipulating the system, and even if they do properly vote to mirror that of those who voted for them, a candidate can still win the presidential election without actually consenting with the majority of the nation. (On a side note, as Mr. Chazen explained in class today, not only was this power to manipulate possible with the Electoral College, it is the entire basis of its existence. If one were to argue that protecting the common man from his or her own's decision is still necessary with the Electoral College that is implemented today, then that would still be an illogical statement as it is illegal to do so in over half of the states, once again making this useless implementation in modern society even more obsolete).
Ultimately, the Electoral College may have had some reason in the early years of the United States, but just like how much of the nation has evolved since then, it is only logical that such a crucial system, which directly effects the course of this country, would adapt with the times.
The the electoral college should definitely be abolished because it is outdated and there is definitely a lot of room for things to go in the wrong direction. There are too many chances for electors to be faithless or for them to do what they're expected, but ending up with a tie between the two+ candidates, or with just nobody getting 270 votes, therefore leaving it up to the House of Representatives to choose a president for the good of the United States, but this can often have very different results than those of the popular vote. With the electoral college, there is little doubt that your state's electors will vote how you want them to overall as a state, but they don't always have to.
It's outdated in that when the framers created it, it was to appease the general mistrust of the public by the federalists, so they would be voting, but not directly for the president, so the electoral college helped to make it fewer random "stupid" citizens voting for the future of the entire country. Today, almost everybody in the United States that can and would vote actually understands the government at least to the point of a high school government class, such as this one, and are literate, much smarter than the average citizen when the Constitution was written.
I agree with Abby that it does have advantages, such as the voting is pretty even, but the bad outweighs the good. It will be hard to come up with a system that incorporates the good of the electoral college system and fix the problems of it as well, but there has got to be a problem, and I'm sure that if the country thinks about it for long enough, we will come up with a better alternative, such as direct elections by district or something like that, to even out the influence of the larger states.
The Electoral College should be abolished because it is outdated and not necessary. The Electoral College was originally created because the framers did not believe that the American people were educated enough to choose a president. Today people are more educated and are capable of deciding on a president. Of course, there will always be uninvolved people in the world who probably should not be voting for the president but they still get a vote because they are American citizens. The Electoral College is unnecessary because people should have all the power to decide the president. One person, one vote.
With the Electoral College, candidates for president will only spend their time going around to states with a larger population and not pay attention to smaller states. They should be focused on the nation as a whole and not on specific states. Also, people in larger states can have less power than people in smaller states because the amount of electoral votes is dependant on how many representatives there are in Congress per state. Every state has at least three members in Congress so technically they can have more electoral votes than they really deserve giving the residents of smaller states more power in their vote. Parties would then have to advertise more throughout the nation and spread advertising out to all of the states, not just a few. We are also voting for a national president so we should not be voting with our state but we should be voting as a country.
Another reason we should abolish the Electoral College is that a candidate who wins the popular vote can still lose the election if the other candidate gets more electoral votes. This has happened three times in history and it is bound to happen again as long as we still have the Electoral College. The people should be making the direct decision on who the president is and not the electors. The electors aren’t even required in the Constitution to vote for who they tell the people they will vote for. They can go against the people to help decide who the president will be which is not fair or ethical.
Thus, the electoral college is not necessary because it does not equally give each person one vote, people from smaller states have more power, and because a candidate who wins the popular vote won’t become president if they don’t get all the electoral votes too. We should not have the Electoral College but instead just have popular vote to fairly represent the people.
Today in the 21st century, I see no reason for there to be an Electoral College. With the United States having a literacy rate of 99% and every person being required to attend school until they are 16, on average, Americans as a whole are more educated then they were when the founders created the electoral college. Also, in the past 100 or so years, technology has greatly improved, and as a result, so has communications. This means that the two issues for having the Electoral College, lack of communication and people not being educated, are virtually nonexistent. I say that Americans can handle having a popular vote to decide the president. The Electoral College should be abolished.
Although many people have argued that the Electoral College should be kept because it gives advantages to small states, it should actually be abolished for that very reason. As it stands, small states have more electoral votes per capita than large states, giving their citizens a disproportionately large voice. Two votes should not have different levels of influence just because they are cast by people from different locations. The Electoral College diminishes the value of votes from citizens of large states, undermining the concept of equality in voting.
While it seems to take power away from the people to continue having an electoral college, an electoral college actually puts power back into the hands of the states. The winner take all system forces the ruling majority in each state to be recognized significantly. A state whose majority votes liberal will be recognized as a state that takes its own majority as supreme and supports a liberal candidate (same with any other party). Although the minority voters will feel as if their votes are not being taken into consideration, as a resident of the state, it is not that their vote does not matter but rather the collective recognition of the majority desire as a state and the resulting state's electoral votes contribute as one mass of votes. If majority rules is going to be the thesis of democracy then the decision is finite and the state stands by its majority regardless.
The Electoral College should be kept because it has served and continues to serve as the most efficient and effective method of electing the president without sacrificing too much democracy and the safety of the nation. The Electoral College has effectively selected the president for over 200 years, nearly 250. This system has kept a president in power that’s reasonably fair and isn’t a dictator or too much of a nut case. Further, these ideas were carefully constructed and planned with much time and by many geniuses of the 18th century: Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin to name a few.The foresight and genuineness of these men has survived through the constitution and has helped our nation function as we adhere to the values our founding fathers created. Further, this form of election is very efficient: only 538 votes decide the president rather than many million that would demand recounts and involve a lot of error. Moreover, changing the Electoral College to direct popular consent would involve changes of the organization of election and involve extra work and money, something our country need to spend less of. Additionally, the Electoral College doesn't sacrifice democracy: it filters it so that electors represent the people while making decisions according to the wisdom and experience. Of course this has led to some differences in popular vote and electoral vote, but this is the way the framers intended it. Besides that, electors normally follow the people in the state anyway. Further, the amounts of electors states get reflect their population without bigger states having an unjust advantage over small ones. Moreover, the Electoral College keeps a majority faction among the people from seizing control of the nation. Overall, the Electoral College has served that nation well and protects it from factions and keeps democracy justly balanced and intact.
The Electoral College was once a fundamental part of the American political process, today however, it is simply an outdated and pointless way of electing the President. While it would be hard to abolish the College, as it is a part of the Constitution and would require an amendment, it should be done. I agree it was the best system of electing the president when the Framers added it into the Constitution, however nowadays their rational is invalid. The College was invaluable in the past, protecting ill-educated Americans from electing the candidate that is best for the country as well as the fact that it was also the quickest and most efficient way to get the election done. Today technology gives us, as the first blend space video revealed, the ability to send messages from Missouri to California in 0.012 seconds whereas the same journey on horseback would take a full week. Because American literacy and education levels have increased dramatically while the speed of sending information from place to place has decreased equally rapidly, we no longer need the Electoral College. Furthermore, the College is supposed to vote the way the people vote in the popular election, and in 26 states the electors have no choice but to vote as the people in their state did. In fact, only 73 times since the ratification of the Constitution has an elector voted for a candidate that did not win the popular election. Because the electors vote the way of the popular election in almost every example, the electoral college is shown as a useless middleman that hinders the American democratic process. Since Americans are no longer the illiterate, uneducated people of the past, since messages and information no longer travel at the pace of a snail, and since the College simply votes the same way as the popular election and is an insult to the democratic system of government our country strives for, the Electoral College should be considered useless and should be abolished.
The U.S definitely abolish the Electoral College. Back then, a large portion of the population was illiterate so they had little knowledge of politics. Therefore the Electoral College was created. Now, the general public has a much larger understanding of politics so they don't need to elect electors in order to choose for them. The system of the Electoral College has many flaws; the biggest one is that the president who is elected may not win the popular vote. This is a problem because it does not accurately represent the desires of the nation. Also, the act of indirectly voting for the president is an issue because electors that people vote for are not forced to vote for the voters' desires or vote for the candidate that they promise to represent. This isn't fair to the people because it causes one person's opinion to inaccurately reflect the opinion of the majority.
The Electoral College cannot evolve and adapt to today’s society, therefore it is and will continue to be outdated. For this reason, without a doubt should the Electoral College be abolished. A nation such as ours cannot continue to allow representatives to take over an entire state with about 49% of those people do not believe in that representatives ideals. However we cannot have a Proportional electoral vote because that will make it even harder to achieve those 270 electoral votes. If 270 votes are not achieved, then the vote goes to the House. This brings me to my second reason which is we cannot trust the House of Representatives with vote of the President. This is because the House is already gerrymandered to an infinite number that skews elections towards one side. Therefore the votes of the House will not be the vote of the people and instead benefit that one party. My final point is that the basis of the United States is that everyone has a voice and all those voices are equal. Currently, the Electoral College gives more power to those whom are of higher status (super electors) and those “select few” who vote FOR us. Not only is this taking power away from the people, but also poses the risk for faithless electors to abuse the system and stray away from the people. The ONLY way to get out of the pandemic is by establishing a direct democracy, or a TRUE democracy. Equality will be established and it will be harder for the representatives to corrupt the process without it going to the house. A direct election will be the chance for us to become the sovereign nation that we’ve tried to establish.
There is a danger in treating the constitution as if it was religious text. The "founding fathers" were just people, and no one knew that more than they did.
Here is a quote from Thomas Jefferson to illustrate my point:
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
Saying we should keep a law or policy "because it works" is not how democracy is supposed to work. What happens in our government is our prerogative. One way to look at government is that every time a new law is passed, we give up a little freedom. Every opportunity we have to gain power in our government for the people is not an opportunity to be missed. We already directly elect senators (a change from the original constitution) and the country wasn't thrown into chaos.
The direct election is brutally fair. It may not give as much power to small states, but it is, exactly, what the people want. This is the most democratic method for the most powerful position in the government.
The United State should keep the Electoral College. It should stay in place because the Electoral College is an example of indirect democracy, as well as federalism, by giving the states more involvement in the election of the federal president. The way the Electoral College is able to give the states the power to elect their president is by allowing the popular vote to decide which candidate gets the vote for that state. This is not a direct count of the citizen’s view, but it decreases the possibility of larger bodies of people voting for a single candidate, such as all the poor voting for a particular democrat. This makes sure that factions cannot take over, avoiding an unfair advantage.
I believe that the Electoral College, although it is not perfect, keeps a stable process for electing the presidents of the United States. Some may say that the process of going through electors to get new presidents is unfair, because the electors could change their votes last minute. I agree in this aspect, because I believe an elector should vote for what is best for the country, rather than for the individual. However, the Elevtoral College is a stable process that helps our voting process run smoothly. It also opens doors for minority groups and new ideas. I think that the Electoral College should maybe be revised, or fixed to improve more recent issues in the voting process, however without it I believe voting would be very hard and complicated. I agree with the basis of the Electoral College, however it needs to be improved and updated.
I agree with James and Helen, the electoral college should be abolished in favor of a more direct method, either straight direct elections or proportional electoral votes. Candidates are given too many electoral votes due to the "winner-take-all" method we use now. I also lean more towards direct elections than proportional electoral voting because if 270 electoral votes are not reached under the proportional system the decision goes to the House (and Senate for VP), which again takes power out of the hands of the people.
The United States should keep its electoral college because it helps unify the country and stability of the nation. The College forces candidates to distribute their campaign money and time across the whole nation in order to win supporters. Candidates cannot spend all their time in one populated area and hope to win all the popular votes because they would only win the electoral votes for the states. So even if all the people in the state voted for one person, they still would only have the electors votes. For example, if all the popular votes of Missouri were in favor of one person, they would have about six million, but only 11 of 538 electoral votes. Candidates are forced to win support from many states and regions which means that the candidates have to set policies and serve to what the people need from all across the country. Thus, creating a more nation with the popular support distributed, resulting in national unity.
Also, the Electoral College encourages a two-party system. Third parties have an extremely low chance of winning an election with the electoral college so they usually join one of the major two parties. The smaller, third parties make compromises to their sometimes radical views.This creates two, large parties that hold a diverse set of policies and beliefs which best covers the beliefs of the citizens. Citizens usually fall in one of these two parties allowing for the government to better serve the needs of the people. The college also protects the United States from minor parties joining together and forming one large party and electing a candidate which best represented the party’s beliefs which were usually radical.
The Electoral College should still be in place with a couple changes. It is beneficial to have an electoral college to ensure we actually elect a president for office. If the direct election chose the president, minority candidates could steal votes and cause chaos among the system. The Electoral College sways some people to vote for the major parties instead of minority candidates because their vote will make more if an impact in the Electoral College’s decision if it’s with a majority party. It is important to focus on the two major parties because that’s what most Americans want for this country.
One change that should be made is that electors have to vote based on their states wishes. The “faithless elector” should not be able to exist because the majority in that state would be surely angry. The majority vote from the people in a certain state should then give all its electoral votes to that majority party. This gives the people more power instead of having it all rest in elector’s hands. Currently the people have little power in general elections because every time they pass their power and votes onto electors and hope the electors vote how they’re supposed to. The people should have a little more power than they have currently.
Most presidents win the electoral votes as well as the general population vote. There are only 3 exceptions to this, so the Electoral College usually does its job in electing the more favored candidate. This shows the Electoral College does a fine job and there’s no need to abolish it but simply make a change or two.
The electoral college, though flawed, is a stable system of voting. It should not be completely destroyed but may be altered. It may be complex but a complex system is necessary to properly represent a diverse population. Electors are separated by state which makes it difficult for larger interest groups to band together and vote over other interest groups. The number or electors is based off of population which is practical and fair. And even though the people do not directly vote for the president, they still have most of the say in who wins. Also, the backup plans in case of a tie has Congress voting on the president and vice president which creates a balance between federal and state power. All in all, the electoral college has worked effectively for years and should continue to be implemented.
I believe that since the electoral college has such a strong foundation in the American government, it should continue to be practiced an not be abolished. Also, the electoral college allows the process of electing a new president to be civilized and not chaotic. If the US was a direct democracy in which every citizen voted and every voted counted, the process would be crazy and not accurate. With this system, the process is kept clean with a set number of people voting for what their state majority wants.
The Electoral College should be abolished from the process of electing a president for the United States. Not only does the system faulty by not binding the electors to vote for the candidate with the popular vote in the state, the candidate who wins the majority votes of a state, gets all the votes of the state. Furthermore, it is also outdated and reduces the voices of the masses--demographical groups that should definitely be represented. When the framers of the Constitution designed Electoral college, they were trying to create a system in which the majority faction, the poor people, do not monopolize the vote. Nowadays, with considerably increased equality of a citizen’s vote, the masses are the groups that should be represented. Next, they also added in the rules that the elector was not bound to represent the voting turnout of the state. If the elector is not bound to that, the President can be someone that the majority citizens of the United States did not vote for. Furthermore the winner-takes-all rule is very faulty because it prevents third party candidates from ever winning a state's electoral votes, and does not accurately represent the citizens' choice. In conclusion, the Electoral College system should not only be abolished because of its outdatedness, but also because of its potentially inaccurate representation of the American people.
So I started off thinking the Electoral College was a good system but after today's lecture, it seems to be for the best if we change it slightly. I think the Electoral College should still be the position but the candidates should not have a "Winner-Takes-All" benefit. To give the people more power and to make the running more fair for all candidates, such as 3rd party candidates, we should split up the electoral votes based on proportion the candidate won in that state.
The electoral college, or some form of it, should be kept as our method of choosing our president. Despite some flaws, the electoral college provides a balance of power between states when deciding who will govern our nation. Without the electoral college, the 5 or so largest states would have all the power when choosing our government, and presidents would only have to campaign in large population centers. The electoral college prevents tensions between large and small states, and more importantly, due to electors serving as representatives, it prevents factions from controlling who serves in our oval office. So despite its shortcomings, the electoral college is a necessary evil, and needs to remain in place until a better system is created.
The electoral college should be kept so that all states are given a voice and that power and campaigning is not concentrated in the most populous regions of the United States. Without the electoral college, both incumbent presidents and other candidates would give voter-heavy areas an unfair amount of attention and consideration, and much of the country would be disregarded by the executive branch. With the electoral college, even though candidates still focus on the larger states, at least the smaller states are not completely disregarded. However, I agree with Lily that territories need to be able to vote. The US government, claiming to be democratic, cannot deny some of the people they govern (even if they're not part of a state) the right to vote on who is making decisions for them. Proportional electoral voting is also a good idea so that the people's wishes are more accurately represented, while still preserving the safeguard for the smaller states.
Bobby Connor Electoral College
American citizens live in a democracy, all about equality. A person should receive equal representation when voting, in America we do not, it depends on the population of the state you live in. In the Electoral College, representation depends on the population as a state, so “states vote” not people (Baker and Raskin). Every vote should count as a person, and they all should match. Majority ruling and voting with the Popular Vote will make votes equitable.In the past, people have come to America to receive rights, and treatment that is equal. Americans should have their thoughts heard. 65% of average Americans would prefer Popular Vote (Baker and Raskin). Majority should rule. States have passed the law, such as Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington (Fadem et al.). This law has passed their full state government. If so many people prefer the popular vote and it has been through state governments, the Electoral College should not continue.Ultimately, using the Popular Vote to elect the President and Vice President, and eliminating the Electoral College would be a positive change to the constitution. Votes will have equal weight and candidates will have less competition. The Electoral College’s intentions do not apply today. All votes should weigh equal amounts. In most states the candidate with the most votes receives all of the state's electoral votes. Some states have a history of consistently voting Republican or consistently voting Democrat. Candidates pay less attention to states with clear favorites and more attention to large states with no clear favorite.
The Electoral College should remain in action due to the positive effects it creates, the fact that it orients elections around states and the fact that it is the most equitable compromise between popular vote and Congressional vote. As stated by Dan Lowenstein, the Electoral College tends to make majorities that would cease to exist in the popular vote and amplifies the majorities that would be very close. This allows for Presidents to become elected regardless if they received the majority of the popular votes. Furthermore, the Electoral College orients elections around the states. In other words, although it may not appear so, the states and the citizens in those states have a greater impact on the outcome of the presidential election than the federal government does. In this system, the political parties in the state government dictate which electors represent their party based on party loyalty, and the citizens of those states decide which of those electors votes for the president. Lastly, the Electoral College is the fairest compromise between presidential elections by popular votes and presidential elections by Congressional vote. So, although it may seem more democratic to have presidential elections by means of popular vote, the Electoral College was created as an appeasement of those people on opposite sides of the spectrum. There is no possible way to act in favor of everyone, so member of both sides are forced to meet in the middle and create a system that has benefits to both sides, which was exactly what the Framers did at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The Electoral College should be abolished because it is an outdated system that has the potential to undermine what the citizens actually want. The Electoral College was established when framing the Constitution because at the time, much of America was uneducated and illiterate, which is no longer the case. Today, Americans are met with a plethora resources including education and fast-traveling news and media that make them capable of choosing their leaders for themselves without a middleman. Furthermore, the Electoral College weakens the strengths of the voters' voices. Most states practice a winner takes all system. If a candidate wins 51% of the popular vote, all of the state's electors vote for that candidate. This leaves 49% of the people totally unaccounted for, making it unfair. The Electoral College is also unfair because it can allow for a candidate to lose the popular vote, but still earn a seat in office because of the electoral vote. America's leaders need to be a reflection of what America actually wants, not of what the Electoral College wants. The best way to achieve this is via a direct vote, something perfectly achievable and reasonable in a time where people are more aware of the nation's politics and votes can be easily counted electronically.
No matter how effective the Electoral college is when it comes to dealing with the issues in Congress during an election (which it isn't very). The harms of an electoral college far outweigh any potential benefits. This applies not only on a nationwide basis as a president could be elected with only 22 percent of the popular vote, but across every state as well as FPTP style politics seems to make it so that unlikely candidates don't even get a fraction of a chance. Another damn should be given to the millions of Americans who identify as a member of a third party who now have a voice if this ineffective pile of garbage is tossed. BUT WHAT HO! you say, isn't this what James Madison envisioned in order to combat the tyranny of the majority? Why should we toss away such a process? Well perhaps the 26 states that pretty much allow this majority to run rampant anyway should be considered. Despite Madison's warnings we still haven't seen this supposed tyranny anyways. In fact by abolishing the electoral college there may be a smaller chance of having a tyranny as people split into more and more independent parties which further promotes Madison's ideals. tl;dr anyone who supports the Electoral college is rek't
The Electoral College, with out any doubt, should be abolished for many reasons. First, this idea was originally made for fair voting back in the day, and to fully understand that, we have to know that the framers created the Electoral College during the time of the constitution. Meaning it was created when the US only had 13 states. These states were spread over a wide geographical region. Some of the states were large and others were small, so there was some concern about the balance of power between the large and small states. Clearly, if the presidential elections were based only on the popular vote, then the larger states would always have the advantage. Another reason why it was made, is because of the people living in the states back then. Many of the people were illiterate, meaning they weren't the kind of people to have sufficient information to make wise decisions. Now, we have media like the internet, news, radio, etc. that give us more knowledge of who we are voting for. Also I think the winter takes all thing is very unfair because even if a candidate loses by 2% , the other candidate gets all the votes whether the people like it or not. The Electoral College system was designed with good intentions, based on a country that, at the time, was much different from America today, and I believe that it had out dated its efficiency for the 21st century.
I agree with Abby Allgeyer entirely. Why change something that we have used throughly in the history of the United States of America. Abolishing a system that has made it easier to create majorities for presidential elections is completely unnecessary and should not be focused so much into. Additionally, I agree with John Crowley's statement about how "if the Electoral College was never added to the Constitution, states with more population would have much more power on the selection of presidents". This inequality between states would then bring back debates and disputes about small states and their power. Overall, with the Electoral College, small states are represented much more respectfully and majorities are easier to draw.
My thought on abolishing the electoral college is that, yes we should get rid of the electoral college. First, we should abolish the electoral college because the system is considered a "in-direct democracy", in which we elect our president, even though United States is a democracy, so why shouldn't people have the right to elect their own president, instead of having the electors choose it for them, so essentially why have other people make decisions for the people when the people should have the right to make their own decisions. Second, the next reason why we should abolish the electoral college is because of the winner take all system. When states are toss up states when have the electoral college is makes them not decisive at all, thus it distorts campaigns because each presidential nominee would have to go to each of these toss up states, and not going to any other parts of the country, and no candidate has visit all 50 states, therefore if we eliminated it we would see more national campaigns. Third, that the electors to always keep their pledge in who their vote will go to in the election, which these are faithless electors, why should we trust someone to vote for a certain candidate and then vote for another one, in turn we should have the president elected by populous votes because in the electoral college majority in one state takes all votes, expect Nebraska and Maine, but why shouldn't the president be elect that way, a national vote and whoever gets more populous votes should be the next president of the United States.
The electoral college should be kept the way in which we choose our president. Despite its flaws, the electoral college gives the general election a balance of power between states. Without the electoral college, lesser population states will get less of a say in the choice of our president, a person who is to represent the "entire" nation. The electoral college prevents turmoil between states of large populations vs. those of small populations such as Texas again New Hampshire. Despite the electoral colleges flaws, the electoral college is necessary to keep balance between states and with representation.
Although the Electoral College is a key part of federalism, allowing for an easy compromise between large states and small states, there are too many reasons in favor of abolishing the Electoral College for it to remain a part of the United States’ government. For starters, one of the main purposes of it when it was originally created was to ensure that the people electing the president were well informed about the candidates running. At the time of the Electoral College’s creation, early on in the history of the United States, it was hard for common people to stay up to date on elections due to the lack of technology at that time. Because of the technology that America has today, this is no longer a problem; therefore, the Electoral College no longer serves its originally intended purpose. In addition to this, the Electoral College is also rather flawed. It gives more weight to votes cast in small states, and people who disagree with the majority of their state are not represented. Its “winner-take-all” system allows whoever wins the state votes, even if it was only by a little over 50%, to get all of that state’s electoral votes. Along with this, the Electoral College makes it possible for a president who did not win the popular vote, or who does not have support from the majority of voters, to be elected. This can happen as the result of faithless electors, who are members of the Electoral College who do not vote for the presidential or vice presidential candidate that they pledged to their state that they would vote for. All of these reasons in favor of abolishing the Electoral College outweigh the reasons to keep it, proving that it would be more beneficial to get rid of the Electoral College.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because the Electoral College does exactly what it was created for and is still effective to this day with other advantages. First, the Electoral College was created so that both the federal government and the state governments were involved in the process of electing the president. Also it was created to ensure that the masses that do not know anything about politics do not sway the votes for president. If the Electoral College did not exist, the popular votes could be extremely close and then every presidential election would be ineffectively choosing a president. Today, all but two states have the winner-take-all system and it is effective because when a candidate wins the popular vote in the state, they automatically get the votes of the Electoral College for the state. This system shows the view of the majority in the state and ensures that the electors vote with the view of the public in mind. This may make it hard for third party systems, however, the chances of the third party winning is extremely small. However the likeliness of a third party winning a presidential election is very small, and it doesn't depend on what kind of voting system the U.S. has. Lastly, to abolish the Electoral College, the Senate would first have to ratify an amendment with a 2/3 majority and then ¾ of states would also have to agree to ratify it. Because these majorities are hard to get, the electoral college should just stick to what it has been doing because it does what it needs to do: fairly represent the states.
The Electoral College should be abolished as it may deviate the results of an election from he intention of the people and hinder the election process as a whole. This however does not mean a direct election should be instituted in place of it. The original intent for its establishment has long been defeated by the accessibility of information in today's society, which eliminates the need for the power of a secondary established representation in the election process. The winner take all system as a result of restrictions placed upon the final ruling of this institution, more commonly known as the Electoral College, can and has been proven to defeat the purpose of accurate representation of the population of the US in american politics, by establishing totalist principles as loopholes serving only to aid misrepresentation if needed. The argument for its upstanding longevity is hardly any reason for keepsake if the college no longer proves to be an accurate reflection of the general ideals.
The Electoral College should be abolished. The only reason the Electoral College was created is because Federalists had a distrust with the common people because they were thought to be illeterate and unintelligent. This is not the case anymore today. One major issue of the Electoral College is the fact that a candidate could win the "popular vote" and still not become President. This is a problem because it does not represent's the public's desires for a president. Not to mention that a super delegate of faithless elector could not vote the way the public wants them to swing. Before taking AP government, I thought the president was determined by the citizens and what their votes. After this lesson, I have come to realize it is a little more complicated and corupt than that.
I agree with Abby that the Electoral College should stay. Because the United States is already using the Electoral College to help determine the president on Election Day, it should just be kept. It would take a lot of effort to remove or change the Electoral College because it would require a Constitutional amendment. This means there would need to be a 2/3 majority in the Congress and 3/4 majority in the States to approve and ratify the amendment, respectively. The election only occurs every 4 years, making it not a primary issue within the people. Also, there isn’t always a clear majority within the states when voting for the president, so the Electoral College helps exaggerate the majority by siding to one party during the November elections. Even though there is the possibility that a candidate may become president even if they don’t win the popular vote, there’s a very slim chance of that happening. In history it’s only happened 4 times out the 56 elections. With the Electoral College presidential candidates can also focus their campaigns on toss up states who don’t clearly have a decision on a party. As a result of this, voters in these states will focus on the campaign because their votes will be affecting the final outcome of the electoral votes. The Electoral College also helps to stabilize the government by contributing to a two-party system. Also, it is important to include the states through the Electoral College because this reinforces federalism in the United States. The state legislatures have the power to choose the future president and vice president. Overall, having the Electoral College keeps the election process simple and organized.
I agree with Abby and Clara. We should most definitely keep the Electoral College. But i believe that one day it could be abolished, just not now. The common populace is still not ready for the choice of president. Just as the Federalists believe, even in the present day, most people don't know much about politics. They have no idea who they're voting for, who to vote for, and why. The Electoral College has to stay in place until the people can get better educated in politics and not need the electoral college in place. Although this completely undermines democracy it's necessary for the future of the country.
The Electoral College should not be abolished because it has proven to be an efficient and effective way to elect our president. The college was originally created in order to keep large states from having all of the power. In our country today, this is still a relevant worry. Some states have massive populations, and some states have much smaller populations. The college ensures that all citizens have an equal say in who the next president should be. Without the college, the larger, more populous states would have a clear advantage over the smaller states. Throughout our country’s history, this system has worked well and has kept major factions, and states from taking all of the power. In addition, the college upholds the founders desire for an indirect democracy. The college ensures that the citizens do not have too much power in electing the president. Electors cast votes for the actual president instead of citizens, resulting in the indirect election of the president. Also, the electoral college makes majorities. You have to have 270 electoral votes to win an election and become president. If you have any less, or if the vote is tied, the House of Representatives would select the president, and the Senate would select the vice president. If we based presidency off just the popular vote, the candidate with the most votes would win, even if they did not have the majority vote. This could and would most likely anger a majority of the citizens, considering that they did not vote for this person to lead the nation. Further, abolishing the electoral college could only be done by making a constitutional amendment, which would be very difficult and time consuming. Overall, the electoral college stands to be an effective way to elect our president and therefore should not be changed or abolished.
I think that we should keep the electoral college because it balances the power during elections. It also gives the states more power because the electoral votes per state are based on population. It also prevents the use of gerrymandering because the votes come from the state as a whole as opposed to specific districts.
No we should not get rid of the electoral college. Even if it is an obstacle to complete democracy, it acts as a strong safety net for the people and gives important power to the states that keeps them involved in federal elections. I really like what Dan Lowenstein talked about with the electoral college simplifying the voting process and psychologically giving the president a “majority vote” that the people can reference and trust because they know that the individual in office is elected by the majority. By giving the power to the states’ electors, the people are also insured such that if the candidate voted on election day is found incapable for any reason, the electoral college takes its vote in December, so that a new President could be chosen. Trying to change the system would be too much work, as it would need an amendment from the constitution requiring 2/3 majority in Congress and ¾ ratification by the states. I think the Framer’s system has a positive effect as a tradition and a reminder of the way things used to work.
The electoral college should not be abolished for many reasons. One reason is that the majority of people cannot be trusted because, even today, they are mostly still uneducated and misinformed. Another reason people cannot be trusted is that we're selfish, its in human nature, some of us are less selfish than others, but no one is completely selfless. This means that people can easily be fooled into making poor decisions when voting, and it also means that people will place their interests over others'. This is one reason why democracy doesn't work, because the majority will always have the ability oppress the minorities. Thus a president elected by the majority could use his/her power to oppress his/her opponents who make up the minority. Another reason the electoral college should not be abolished is that it spreads the power out among the states and gives states with less people slightly more power than those with large populations. The fear of a president winning the electoral college without the popular vote is largely unjustified because while it can happen, it has only happened twice. Therefore the people usually get who they want anyway. The because the electors of the college can choose whoever they want they can reject poor choices by the people if that ever needed to happen. I do not believe the system is perfect as I think there are some improvements that could be made.
Post a Comment