Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Disadvantages of electoral college
Essay on the effectivness of 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.
Recommended: Disadvantages of electoral college
People have known since childhood that people getting more of a say is unfair. This is exactly the case with the Electoral College. The Electoral College is system in which people vote regionally and that region gets a certain number of votes based off its Senators and House of Representatives. This system is unfair as it give more of a say to those in smaller states. Big states aren't given enough votes to match their population while small states have a limit to how few votes they get. The Electoral College shouldn’t be a part of our government as in undermines democracy.
By far the biggest issue is that certain regions get more of a say in who wins the election. Despite representing 35 million people california only gets 55 Electoral votes. Where Wyoming gets 3 for its 500 thousand people. This is terrible as it gives Wyoming 3.8 times more of a say per person. If a candidate doesn’t get over 50% of the vote the decision will be up to the House of Representatives. This is even worse as
…show more content…
You need a majority of 270 votes to be president. This prevents the voter from voting 3rd party therefore splitting up the vote. Ultimately this makes there be a two party system that doesn’t feel it needs to be what the American people want but better than the other party. This system keeps the major parties in a dominating control. When the major parties roll out two terrible candidates the american voter has little choice but to vote for who is the least bad. If the two parties don’t have any fear of third parties winning they can push a candidate who the American people don’t like through to presidency. Some may say that minor parties should never get the presidential office as they’re too extreme but this isn’t always the case and fearing that a majority of the population will believe in the extreme is very impractical. Minor parties have no place in the american presidential office with the Electoral
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 feel pointless. This has always been a big thing for the United States, as 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 recent history no 3rd party candidates have come anywhere close to getting a substantial number of votes in the presidential elections. The last time a minor party was able to win a presidential election, was with Abraham Lincoln, in 1860. He was not truly campaigning under a minor party either; the Republican Party which he ran for had recently gained control of the congress and was becoming well established in the federal government. This is a key issue that 3rd parties must understand before they consider putting up a candidate for president.
If the candidate doesn't win the electors' votes, then they will not have a chance of winning.
Why should more than a million-and-a-half California supporters of George W. Bush see all 54 of the state's electoral votes go to Al Gore? In short, what is wrong with apportioning each state's electoral votes in accordance with the way the state's electorate votes? A better question, no doubt, is why not ditch the electoral college system altogether and go to direct elections? Politicians as different as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Richard Nixon backed a constitutional amendment to have all the states go to a proportional system. Obviously, nothing came of the proposals.
The Electoral College system should be scrapped and be replaced with popular vote because it is unfair. By abolishing the Electoral College and replacing it with popular vote, it would represent citizens equally, it would allow citizens to elect their president just as they elect their governors and senators, and it would motivate and encourage citizens to participate in voting.
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.
The United States of America is often touted as the guiding beacon of democracy for the entirety of the modern world. In spite of this tremendous responsibility the political system of the United States retains some aspects which upon examination appear to be significantly undemocratic. Perhaps the most perplexing and oft misunderstood of these establishments is the process of electing the president and the institution known as the Electoral College. The puzzle of the Electoral College presents the American people with a unique conundrum as the mark of any true democracy is the citizens’ ability to elect their own ruling officials. Unfortunately, the Electoral College system dilutes this essential capacity by introducing an election by
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
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 today is a very complex system of voting and campaigning. When it was first created, the Framers thought the average citizen of their day was not intelligent enough to know who should be leading their country. So they created the Electoral College which was run by people who knew what they were doing. The Electoral College is a body of people who represent each state and they determine the president. The real question is: Has the Electoral College gotten too far out of hand where it needs to go? The answer is yes. The reasons are because any third party candidate running in the election has no chance of winning any electoral votes. Also, it gives too much power to the big states in electoral votes. Finally, it creates problems on majority electoral votes and equality of smaller states is diminished.
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.
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.
The Founders built certain protections for individual rights into this country's founding documents. The United States Constitution was one such document. In particular, such protections guard Americans who hold minority viewpoints from those who side with the majority. For example, the First Amendment protects the right of free speech to ensure that people who hold unpopular views have just as much freedom to express those views as do people who tend to agree with the majority. The United States Constitution, therefore, was intended to protect the individual rights of Americans from a tyrannical government and majority. However, today, the Electoral College does not represent the vibrant democracy into which the United States has grown.