More handpicked essays just for you.
The truth about the electoral college
A short note of electoral college
How does the electoral college work essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In America, voting for the President is a privilege and a lie. Many Americans think when they go to the polls in November, they are voting for the President of the United States; but really, they are voting for a group of electors who have pledged to support a nominee for the President. The Founding Fathers were concerned that presidents would always come from a populous state and wondered whether the public would have the knowledge of various candidates necessary to make a wise selection. They did not have access to technology like the internet or smart phones as we do. In most states, as the result of the election, the state awards all its electors to the winning candidate (Belenky 1308). A Presidential a candidate must win 270 Electoral …show more content…
The electors in each state are equal to the number of representatives that state has in Congress resulting in at least three electors per state regardless of population (McKenzie 285). Each state has two votes to correspond to the senators representing that state in Congress, and then each state has one vote to correspond to the House representative that represents that state in Congress. Smaller states comprise a higher percentage of the total electoral votes than would a popular vote for the president in those states (Muller 1257). The Founders intended the Electoral College to protect overshadowing the small states’ interests of the larger populous states by allowing at least three representative votes rather than none at all, and the smaller states were not willing to give control of the election process to the larger states, which was similar to their fight for representation in Congress (Muller 1250). However, it ignores the people who voted against the winner, since once the result is determined at the state level; the losing voters no longer have any significance nationally (Wagner 579). Wagner also points to the fact that the winner-take-all system can lead to selecting the minority candidate over the majority vote, as in the George …show more content…
In fact, the Constitution contains provisions for direct and indirect election of the different parts of the legislature and the executive, based on overlapping but distinct electorates (Muller 1251). In addition, many people believe that, the Electoral College process of electing the president necessitates replacement with a direct popular vote to honor our democratic form of government in the United States. Moreover, in a democratic form of government, the authority rests with the people rather than in one or a few as in a totalitarian or authoritarian form of government. People believe a direct election supports the 14th Amendment principle of “one person, one vote” (Wagner 577). Therefore, the winner-take-all system inaccurately represents the will of the American citizens since not all candidates garner any electoral votes. On the other hand, a popular vote for the president could lead to many runoffs if neither candidate reaches a majority, creating a bigger opportunity for voter fraud and manipulation of the vote, which would not truly represent the will of the people, states, or country. The Electoral College sometimes fails to represent the national popular vote because states use the winner-take-all approach and not some proportional method for the representation of its voters. However, the Founding Fathers were not too keen on
Abolishing the Electoral College is the best option for our democracy because keeping it slim the chances for independent candidates to win and unfair voting distribution to exist. In Document B, the 1992 presidential election shows Ross Perot with 19,743,821 votes but 0 electoral votes. Independent candidates like Ross Perot don’t get any electoral votes but millions of popular votes. This proves my claim to be true because major party candidates are receiving all electoral votes and are not allowing independent candidates to have a fair election. In Document F it states, “Because each state casts only one vote, the single representative in Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California,
The Electoral College is a system where the President is directly elected. This process has been used in many past elections as well as the current 2016 election. This process also helps narrow down the large numbers that were made by the popular votes, into a smaller number that is easier to work with for electing the President. Some states use a system called “winner-takes-all”, which is another system that is connected with the Electoral College. This allows a candidate with the most electoral votes, to get the rest of the votes that the state provides. This has made it very unfair to many people, because the Electoral College has the most advantage for candidates. The Electoral College is a very unfair system that causes any candidate to win easily if he or she has the highest votes, and makes the number of voters
If you think on the Election Day, you just voted for US president, than you are mistaken, just like millions of Americans who hope their votes would pick next president. When voting for President, we actually vote for state electors who hold Electoral votes. Electoral votes are the votes that decide victory of candidate in election. This Electoral College System has limited democracy to people in major three ways. Electoral college holds an ability to alter result of Election over popular votes, discriminates candidates to campaign in certain states not others, and creates high voter turnouts.
The fact that the popular vote holds no power to whom becomes president shows that only some of the people have the power. This seems like a sign that our own government doesn’t have faith in the population to make an educated decision on who should become president. The way smaller states votes are more important than bigger states, shows that states are still not equal in power. The way to win the presidency is more of a strategy than having the ideas to be elected. An example of this is how the electoral college elected George Bush when Al Gore won the popular vote. George Bush is said to be one of the United States worst presidents and was elected through a thought to be flawed system. I also feel as though corruption plays a role in the electoral college compared to the popular vote being authentic. I think this should be replaced with a system of electronic voting that could accurately and clearly show who the majority of the population voted for. But I also think that some sort of requirements to vote should be enacted. Education plays a big role in politics and I feel as though there are people who just vote to be voting with no kind of background knowledge. As bad as it sounds I feel like it could narrow a better decision being made than smaller, less developed states being “mind controlled” into voting for
Due to the discrepancy between the winner of the popular vote and the winner of the electoral college in the most recent election, there has been a lot of talk about eliminating the electoral college and moving to a direct popular vote. While many people argue for this shift, usually with little knowledge of what a popular vote election would look like, there are also many citizens who are opposed to the idea. In our polarized political climate, this fact is not surprising. Those who support the electoral college defend it by claiming that it is not only constitutional, but it also represents the whole county, and makes for a more certain, legitimate election process.
Some people believe the Electoral College system weakens the fundamental principle of a representative government- that one person should have one vote. If we switch to a popular vote, people will have a greater amount of saying than before. The candidates will have a better chance to get
I noticed that when one political party covers almost the entirely of the map, their party will continue winning the election for several years. Like how the election of 1932, the democratic party had about 88% of the electors votes and about 60% of the popular votes. The democratic party continued to win the next four elections.
The American Society grants every citizen of legal age to vote in elections. The Electoral College System provides electoral votes to candidates despite losing popular votes. The Electoral College System is unfair as candidates who do not win popular vote can still win a presidential election. This system is unfair as it grants 538 electors to become the voice of 319 million people.
This process of electing a president is unjust and is not based off of the people’s views. In Document D the chart provided illustrates how some of the electoral votes favor some states over others; for example the twelve states listed and the district of Columbia seem to have a bigger say in the presidential election process than the citizens of Illinois. This itself is unfair because Illinois deserves to have an accurate representation of their votes, the same as other states do. This shows that the Electoral College undercuts the principle of one person, one vote, and therefore violates political equality. “It is not a neutral counting device... it favors some citizens over others, depending solely upon the state in which voters cast their votes for president” (Document D). Political equality means all citizens are equal and it also allows citizens to partake in state affairs, including the right to vote and the right to challenge elections. However the Electoral College violates the principle of this for the fact that it weighs some citizens’ votes more heavily than others (video). Generally it makes no sense for the people to vote if they’re not even counted, and either way it violates their rights.
Originating in 1787, the Electoral College was created as the official body within American politics that elects the president and vice president. The decision of who will win is based off the vote totals in each state, and “the founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.” (U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, “What is the Electoral College?”). During this time, the job of the Electoral College was to make peace between differing states and federal interest groups, provide popular participation in elections, give a vote to less populated states, and keep the president’s powers separate from Congress.
As the United States of America gets older, so does the presidential election voting system. The argument to change this method of voting has been becoming more and more popular as the years go on. It has been said that the Framers of the Constitution came up with this method because of the bad transportation, communication, and they feared the public’s intelligence was not suitable for choosing the President of the United States. Others say that the Framers made this method because they feared that the public did not receive sufficient information about candidates outside of their state to make such a decision based on direct popular vote. My research on this controversial issue of politics will look into the factors into why the Electoral College exists and if it is possibly outdated for today’s society. It will look into the pros and cons of this voting system, and it will explore the alternative methods of voting such as the Direct Popular vote. Many scholarly authors have gathered research to prove that this voting system is outdated and it does not accurately represent the national popular will. Many U.S. citizens value their vote because they only get one to cast towards the candidate of their choice in the presidential election. Based on the Electoral College system their vote may possibly not be represented. Because of today’s society in the U.S. the Electoral College should be abolished because it is not necessary to use a middle-man to choose our president for us. It is a vote by the people, all of us having one voice, one vote.
In the United States we are all guaranteed one vote per person. Everyone has an equal voice in electing the people that serve in the government. Every four years during the month of November citizens of America go to the polls to vote for a president and vice-president of the United States. Am I right? Not really. They actually vote for electors that then vote for our president. It makes me wonder, "Are we a democracy?" Having the Electoral College defeats its purpose. I oppose the electoral college for these three reasons, in election 2000 the president that lost the popular vote actually won, everyone's vote doesn't really count, plus the electoral college has disrupted elections fifteen times!
Americans do not vote for their presidential or vice-presidential candidate. Instead, they indicate their preference of candidate. Whichever candidate gets a plurality of the vote in a state gets all the Electors for that state. Each state's number of Electors is based on the number of Representatives and Senators it has in Congress. Once a candidate gets a plurality, the Electors vote in the "Electoral College" (a sort of caucus in their state six weeks after the election) for that candidate. So a candidate who gets just one more vote than the other in a given state wins all the votes from that state. Notably, although it is called a College, the Electoral College is a process administered by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). It is not a particular place (NARA 1).
With the Electoral College in place, the United States remains a true Representative Democracy. By having electors, who are nominated to cast their vote for the president, the nation distances itself from a Direct Democracy (Longley). While creating the nation, many people believe the founders were strictly concerned with power to the citizens. However, they truly did not give the people much “political credit” (Longley). In fact, the “framers expressly ejected” the idea of popular vote, and felt using state electors was the only fair method of electing the president (Gringer 2008). They also understood “it would be unlikely for a candidate to have a nationwide presence among the people” (Patel, 2012) Delegate Elbridge Gerry believed a plan using popular vote was “radically vicious” and feared that the “people are uninformed, and would be misled by a few designing men” (Gerry 1787). They framers understood many people do not have a lot of information on, or background in politi...
Around the world there are countries that still don’t allow some or all of their citizens to vote. However in America the right to vote is simply given to every American citizen over the age of 18. So you’d think that every US citizen over the age of 18 would be voting for everything, right? WRONG. Out of everyone in the US only 57% voted at our last presidential election. So out of the two hundred and forty-eight million people in the United States of as of November 30 who are eligible to vote only about 57% of the population will vote for the presidency. So out of two hundred and forty-eight million people only about one hundred and forty-three million citizens will cast their vote in the upcoming presidential election. And this is a vote