More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on why the electoral college
Essays on why the electoral college
Electoral college of united states of america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 established the process of the electoral college. The electoral college can be defined as a group of people representing their state’s population to form a majority of electoral votes that determines the United States Presidency and Vice Presidency. There are many debates on whether the electoral college properly displays democratic values. In this paper, I will go over the pros and cons of the electoral college process and gather creditable sources proving the electoral college is not democratic.
The History Central website posted an article, “ Why the Electoral College” by Marc Schulman that suggests the Framers created the electoral college process over a popular election because they feared tyranny
…show more content…
Some American’s see the electoral college as a downfall to the U.S. Constitution because it fails to acknowledge the change in technology the framers were accustomed to. It gives too much power to swing states, and neglects the will of the people. (1) Back in 1787, the everyday citizen was not as exposed to mass media like there is today. With wide-spread social media spreading more up-to-date knowledge about the candidates allows the population to be very informed on their vote. A Nov. 6, 2016 episode of PBS NewsHour revealed that "Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have made more than 90% of their campaign stops in just 11 so-called battleground states. Of those visits, nearly two-thirds took place in the four battlegrounds with the most electoral votes — Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina." (2). The most unsettling thing most American’s have with the electoral college is that it neglects the popular vote. Going back to the most recent election Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over three million, but did not gain enough electoral votes to win the election. This upset many people because it showed how the electoral college does not always represent what the majority wants. The electoral college is set up on a winner take all basis, meaning if forty-nine percent of the state voted for Trump and fifty-one percent voted for Hillary, all …show more content…
Stanford University defines democracy as “a political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. Protection of the human rights of all citizens, A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens”.(7) The Framers of the constitution did not have the intentions of making this process democratic. First, democracy is defined to protect and apply equally to all citizens. Yet, black men, poor men, and women were excluded in the early years of voting. Secondly, it is not a fair election if the elector voters switch their votes that the majority elected them to vote for. Lastly, it is not democratic for small states and swing states to have such huge impacts on the elections. As stated in the second paragraph, the proportion of votes to representation between states are not equal which goes against fair elections because of location. The framers chose the electoral college without democratic ideas in mind allowing for their best image of the election process to be. As times have changed since 1787, it may be crucial for a revision to help the voting process be more
This has has always been a big thing for the United States, has it’s people are bringing in a new person who would eventually lead their country into a good path. When it comes to actually doing the rough work like voting for a new President, that would be an entirely different story. In a chart from Document G, there are 4 past elections listed that compares the popular votes to the electoral votes. In the 2000 election, George W. Bush won by 271 electoral votes, while Gore won by 266 electoral votes. This may seem reasonable for Bush to be the president, but when it comes to the popular vote, although, Gore had highest amount of popular votes than Bush did. So why did Bush win instead? This is one of the main reasons why the Electoral College should be abolished. If the Electoral College stays then the people will not be able to choose the right person for the right job. So this shows how it can cause so many people to be frustrated with the Electoral College, which does not really help the country at all, in terms of the choosing a new
Electoral College is Wrong The Electoral College is the name given to a group of electors who are nominated by political activists and party members within the states. The electoral college really isn't necessary and should be abolished. There are numerous reasons why this is so important. With the Electoral College in effect, third parties don't have a chance to become the president, which isn't fair.
The Electoral College has been the favored method by the United States to elect the president for many years. When the College was first created in 1787 it was seen as an efficient and reliable way to vote the president into office. It has been more than 2 centuries since this method of electing was chosen and many things have changed in U.S. society. The Electoral College is failing to keep up with these advancements in society and a new method must be chosen soon.
Every four years, the citizens of America migrate to their respective polling locations and cast their vote. On this important day, the second Tuesday of November, the next President of the United States is elected. The election race for United States presidential candidates undergo a political marathon, negotiating primaries, party conventions and an electoral college system along the way. The electoral college is one of the main aspect of a presidential election. The Electoral College is made up of electors in each state, who represent the states popular vote. Each presidential party or candidate designates a group of electors in each state, equal to the States electoral votes, who are considered to be loyal to that candidate, to each State’s
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.
The Electoral College was created by the framers at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. They believe that it wasn’t a good idea for the people to elect the president directly because they did not trust that voters would have enough information to make a good choice. The Electoral College basically chooses who the next president will be since it takes away our freedom to vote. The Electoral College should be abolished because it’s undemocratic, the small states are overrepresented, and it hurts third parties. The United States of America is a democratic country that is characterized by the equality of rights and privileges.
Voting is at the center of every democratic system. In america, it is the system in which a president is elected into office, and people express their opinion. Many people walk into the voting booth with the thought that every vote counts, and that their vote might be the one that matters above all else. But in reality, America’s voting system is old and flawed in many ways. Electoral College is a commonly used term on the topic of elections but few people actually know how it works.
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
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.
The Electoral College was a compromise between those at the Constitutional Convention who wanted the US president elected by popular vote and those who wanted congress to select the president. They believed that having it where each state would get a certain number of votes based on population would keep a manipulative and charming person out of office. They thought it would prevent bribery and corruption along with secret dealings. I don’t think that this is the case and it one of the reason I feel that the Electoral College should be abolished.
The Electoral College vs. Popular Vote The United States is a privileged country with freedoms and opportunities many countries strive to achieve. People come into the United States in hopes of obtaining these rights and a better life for themselves; they strive to achieve “The American Dream.” Citizens are given the chance to vote, speak their mind, and live according to their desires without prejudice. However, the same government that promises hope has flaws that frustrate the American people: the Electoral College is one topic of debate. Many feel this system is a safe way to regulate who leads the country, while others feel that issues should be left to popular vote.
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.
First of all I would like to bring to your attention that many votes don't even get counted if you call the United States a democracy. The way the whole Electoral College thing works is that each state is allowed a certain number of "electors" (the state's number of Representatives plus its Senators), who then vote for the president. The elector's vote based on the state's popular vote. After the state verifies the votes, the candidate that receives the most votes get all of that state's elector's votes. Because the state's constitution awards electoral votes that way, the innumerable individual votes become meaningless. Does that sound fair to you? It doesn't to me.
Considering the Constitution excludes the four groups which make-up a majority of America during the time; women, slaves, indentured servants, Native Americans and men who have no land, how can one regard the constitution as a democratic document? Although the Constitution excluded a majority of its citizens and was founded by elitist framers, because it is a document that depends solely on the interpretation of its reader, it has progressed overtime. As Madison notes, it is our diversity that unites us as a nation. Without the Constitution, perhaps I wouldn't even have had the opportunity to write this essay and question my country's Constitution.