The electoral college is a process the founding fathers established in the constitution with the intent to create a safeguard between the population and the selection of a president, and to give extra power to smaller states. However, based on the information presented in the articles the electoral college should be abolished as it violates our right of political equality, and fails to represent a third, independent, party in any election. Although there are many reasons to abolish the electoral college, the principal reason to take action would be the result of an obvious violation of our right to be politically equal. As shown in the chart provided (Doc D) 12 of the lowest populated states and the District of Columbia have almost the
The opposers of the Electoral College would argue that because of the “winner-takes-all” nature of these states, “candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the ‘swing’ states,” in the words of Bradford Plumer from Source 2. Though this can be true, people fail to realize that those swing states are toss-ups in the presidential election because they feature differing interests and a wide array of voters that candidates must appeal to to succeed. Because the Electoral College gives votes to smaller and bigger states, it also guarantees that less populous states still have a say in who runs our country. And while they do have fewer votes than the larger states with millions of more overall voters, this system prevents the smaller regions from being completely unrepresented. It also ensures that candidates campaign around the country, not just in the few big states with substantial populations, since no singular area of the United States has enough votes to win the election for a nominee, as described in Source
This makes the presidential candidates campaign across all of the United States and forces development across the country. Thus limiting the dangers of region problems that is extremely common in all larger country like china and even afflicted great empires like the Romans. Another large selling point to keeping the electoral college is without it, it effectively destroys one of the most important pillars to the founding fathers, federalism. Federalism is the political idea that allows for a central government, in our case the national government, and regional government, the states, to coexist and contain similar levels of power. The states will no longer need congressional delegates because the interests of the states will be ignored in favor of appealing directly towards the
It gives the smaller states a voice, that could have been ignored if the popular vote only counted. The Electoral College helps the candidates and their party keep their campaign organized, if the they know the amount of votes they are looking for they can organize how much time they spend campaigning in each state (Advantages and Disadvantages of the Electoral College). Also helps keep a sense of stability, but setting up a 2 party system of voting, and also gives the states to make their own laws on voting and being able to make amendments accordingly (Advantages and Disadvantages of Electoral College). The Electoral College also helps avoid the chance of fraud occurring or national recounts (Advantages and Disadvantages of the Electoral College). Even though the system has many advantages it also has many disadvantages as
Most candidates in the race have to win certain states because of how big they are. But if the electoral college were to be abolished these smaller states would not really matter in the election at all. The number of electors must be “equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives” (Document 2). Since these two types of committees are based on the population it must be equal, not less or more. This system also allowed Washington DC to have three electoral votes, it is a system that lets these little states to have a vote.
In the Electoral College, each state gets a number of electors based on its representation in Congress. The Electoral College is the best method for electing a president for the country right now. The first reason the Electoral College is best, is that it ensures that all parts of the country are involved in the
One of the United States’ fundamental beliefs is the idea that fair taxation with equal representation. Author of, “5 Advantages and Disadvantages of Electoral College”, Louise Gaille, elaborates, “In national representation, each state and population district receives equal representation, in either the house or the senate, and that allows individual voters to still have a say in what happens” (Gaille). The Electoral College was built on compromises the Founding Fathers made to ensure the equal ability for everyone to impact the decisions made in the country. Without national representation, states with smaller populations won’t have their votes as considered as the votes from larger states. For example, although Wyoming makes up about .18% of the population, they still control .56% of all electoral votes.
They would ignore the less populated areas in between. They also argue that it would be dangerous and unnecessary to replace a system that has functioned for over 200 years. Proponents of the Electoral College system defend it because they believe that the Electoral College contributes to the cohesiveness of the country by requiring a distribution of popular support to be President, enhances the status of minority interests, contributes to the political stability of the nation, and maintains a federal system of government. Proponents say that the voters of even small miniorties in a State may make the difference between winning all of the State’s electoral votes or none of the State’s electoral votes. They argue that the original design of the federal system was thought out and wisely debated.
This can either be a great or a bad thing for many citizens who are not aware of how the Electoral College takes part in the presidential voting process. There are quite a few reasons why the process is ineffective, but there are three in particular. The first being there are no types of guarantees that the popular vote will win, because there is still the possibility that the defeated by popular vote can be elected for presidency. The second being it can often discourage citizens from voting because there is more to the process than meets the eye which creates the idea that there votes are unworthy. The third being it is harder for smaller states, because of the smaller population one citizens vote will not equal as one vote.
The Electoral College aids in the protection of smaller states with lesser populations (Rotunda). “A purely popular vote would encourage some states (particularly one-party states) to change their voting requirements to increase that state’s influence nationwide” (Rotunda). Even so, the author claims that states with larger populations would want more influence in elections. Although the core of this claim is valid, it is flawed because the state majorities have more of a say in political elections, which sway the way the state votes in a national election. This actually denies the People the right to have a fair say electing a
And it means the residents of the increasingly sparsely populated Southern and Midwestern states have Electoral College votes that are growing in power.” Because of this the Electoral College often neglects larger states, resulting in neglect from candidates when they campaign as they are trying to win swing states. Overall, this causes many states' concerns to not be heard, which leads to citizens believing their vote doesn't matter. Abolishing the Electoral College would resolve this issue as candidates would not feel the need to favor one state over another when campaigning. Candidates would be incentivized to campaign across the entire country, addressing the needs and concerns of all states and their citizens.
Smaller states are greatly favored by The Electoral College which is unjust. It shows a clear amount of bias which goes against The Electoral College’s point of equality and correctness. It directly undermines bigger states and stops democracy from being fully
Though not every state has the same amount of votes, some states are worth more than others, and their amount of votes is based on their population. Therefore, the United States should abolish the Electoral College because it gives people in smaller states more political power than those in larger states. However, some feel the U. S should not abolish the Electoral College
I think we should keep the Electoral College. Electoral College is defined in our textbook as; “An unofficial term that refers to the electors who cast the states’ electoral votes” (Patterson, T.E., 2013). Electoral voting is tied in with the states popular voting. Choosing electoral college adds to the cohesiveness of the nation by obliging an appropriation of popular support to be elected President, improves the status of minority interests, contributes to the political dependability of the country by promising a two-party system, and keeps up an elected arrangement of government and representation (Kimberling, W.C., 2008). I think that the Electoral College system is a big part of the cohesiveness of our country and it requires the distribution
The electoral college also helps the small states have an opinion that actually is heard in the presidential election. In class, it was discussed that Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota together, though their combined population is less than that of Oklahoma, each of those states has three electoral votes, whereas Oklahoma just has seven votes. Going by electoral votes, a candidate would have a better chance at winning the election if they won over Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota versus Oklahoma. With the electoral college, a candidate could win over all thirty-nine small states and win the entire election. Though the candidate could be supported by less than a quarter of the population,
