Electoral College Dbq

In the case of a tie, the House of Representatives and Senate are conjoined to elect the President and Vice President. In this case, each is given one vote, making California’s whooping population of 39 billion equal to Wyoming’s measly 350,000. This overrules the matter of “equal representation” and gives the power to the House and Senate to dictate the outcome of the nation (Doc D).

The result is that in 1988, for example, the combined voting age population (3,119,000) of the seven least populous jurisdictions of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming carried the same voting strength in the Electoral College (21 Electoral votes) as the 9,614,000 persons of voting age in the state of Florida.(Longley) Each Floridian's potential vote, then, carried about one third the weight of a potential vote in the other states listed. Shouldn't each individuals vote carry the same amount of weight regardless of where they live? Another result of the Electoral College is that it tends to give a false representation of victory. In 1980 Ronald Reagan won just 50.7 percent of the popular vote but won the electoral vote by more than 90 percent making it appear as a landslide.(Gregg) Is this fair representation for the American people to believe?

John Samples, author of “In Defense of the Electoral College,” says that the Electoral College is an “important part” of the federalist system of the United States, claiming that it allows for the important principle of state rights. “The Electoral College,” he writes, “makes sure that the states count in presidential elections.” He is not incorrect in that statement- states definitely do count, but they have a much bigger impact than they should. The president is not for the states, but rather for the

Many people argue that the Electoral College is an outdated system. After all, many things have changed in the last two centuries. For one, technology is much more advanced now than it was two hundred years ago. With the internet and television, we can now learn everything about a candidate regardless of where the come from in the nation. It is feasible to have direct election of a president because of these improved methods of communication and the evolution of technology in general.

The electoral college should be abolished because it clearly makes no sense that a presidential candidate can win the popular vote and end up losing the presidency, it's not as democratic as it used to be , and let us not forgot about the 3rd party candidates that you never hear of as often as they should be. There are many unanswered questions about this topic and why this is seen as undemocratic to critics.

One of the greatest accomplishments in the history of the United States was the creation of the Constitution. It was created by the Framers who included many important and specific rules to make sure that the government would be able to sustain itself. The Idea of the Electoral College was first introduced in this constitution as a way to make sure that there was a buffer between the population and the selection of a President. They did not want a dictatorship to arise due to a manipulative candidate. In recent history, the Electoral College has been a very controversial topic. Many people do not agree with it and believe that it should be abolished due to varying factors such as the unequal distribution of votes per state. When the Framers first created the Electoral College, I believe that there hopes of what it would become have not been met and that they would not be pleased with it in today's government.

The electoral college is a system that was put in place by the framers of the constitution for many reasons. The main reason the electoral college is that the framers did not fully trust democracy for they believed that people were not educated enough to vote. After reading an article from Business Insider called The Electoral College Is Brilliant, And We Would Be Insane To Abolish It by Walter Hickey, I agree that the electoral college is necessary for our presidential elections. According to the article the electoral college is good because it keeps errors local, is a testament to a candidate's desire to win, and most importantly, forces majority. In the article opposing the Electoral College I found many of the arguments to be invalid or full of what ifs or buts, and that is why I do not have any reason to believe the electoral college is good.

An Electoral College is a body of people representing the states who formally cast votes for the election of the president and vice president. There is a great controversy on the issue pertaining to if the electoral college. Eric Black, the author of “10 Reasons Why the Electoral College is a Problem”, doesn’t believe we should have an Electoral College because of the fact that there is a discrepancy between the number of voters and the number of electoral votes making it possible to lose popular votes and win the Electoral College, it skews significance on small populated states, and it distorts the presidential campaign. Richard A. Posner on the other hand wrote an article called “In defense for the electoral college” where he argues that

In order to fully understand the underlying problems of the Electoral College we have to look back at the time that the idea of the Electoral College itself was proposed and see how the culture of the time and the ideologies of the people involved helped shaped the final outcome. Life today is much different than it was two hundred odd something years ago, and it’s fair to say that the political ideals and social norms around our society have changed drastically.

But the result of the Electoral College today is to give too much power to the small states. In fact, they have more power than the largest states in the union. For instance, California's population (the largest) is approximately 70 times that of Wyoming's (the smallest). But California only has about 18 times the Electoral College votes (55 to 3) (Raasch 1). According to writer Chuck Raasch, that means a vote in Wyoming has potentially four times the impact in the Electoral College (1). Also, in 1988, the combined voting age population (3,119,000) of the seven least populous states (Alaska, Delaware, D.C., North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming) had the same number of Electoral votes (21) as the 9,614,000 voters in Florida (Kimberling 1).

The Constitution of the United States of America created a system called the Electoral College where it outlines the rules in which we elect the President of the United States of America. As stated in Article 2, Section 1 of the U. S. Constitution created the Electoral College. Each state receives as many electoral votes as it has senators and representatives. Therefore, each state, including the District of Columbia, will have at least three electors. This is the vision of the Constitution. Now the problem arises when all the Electoral votes from one state are given to the popular winner for that state. This causes a with people’s right to chose their leader as votes of the people that voted for the losing candidate are tossed in the trash. All this while giving the state the ultimate power to elect the president.

The last reason I want to keep the Electoral College is because a direct popular election would cause chaos. America is already screwed up enough; we don’t need a presidential election to make it worse. There would be too many petitions, riots, and all kinds of things going on during the election. The people and congress like the way the Electoral College is set up. Also, we don’t need to change it. Doing that would take forever, because if we switch to a direct popular election, many presidents would only win by popular vote. The electoral votes should determine who is president, not how popular he or she is. No one region has the absolute majority of electoral votes that is required to be president. In very close popular elections, it’s possible that the candidate who won a slight majority of the popular vote may not be the person who is elected president. Whether the popularity of that one candidate is concentrated on very few states or spread out across America. The popular

Despite the Electoral College system being founded by the founding fathers in America and being there as long as the Constitution exists, many people still do not have sufficient knowledge on how it works. The Electoral College does not provide honest presidential elections rather it has the potential to undo the will of people at any point from the selection of electors to the vote tallying in Congress (Shaw, 3). Electoral College in the United States has played a major role in depressing the voter's turnout. Every State is given an equal number of electoral votes despite the population and in turn, the system has put in place no measure to encourage the voters to take part in the elections. Besides, the system distorts

The arguments to modify or eliminate the Electoral College system are all derived from the notion that it is outdated. Under the current system if a candidate wins a large states like California, then they win twenty percent of the needed votes even though California only accounts for eleven percent of the U.S. population. What's more is a president can be elected without winning a majority of the popular vote. This has happened 15 times in U.S. history. The

Since the electoral vote is partially based on the state’s representatives in the House, the most populated states have more votes. This can be evidenced above with the four most populated states in the nation, California, Texas, Florida and New York, having the four highest electoral votes in the nation. The question of to whom the state’s electoral votes go to is decided by an elector. An elector is someone who decides to which candidate the state’s electoral votes goes to, electors are instructed to award the votes to whomever wins the state popular vote. However, electors can go against these instructions. Most electors pledge to keep to those instructions but sometimes an elector will cast the state’s electoral against the instructions, these electors are known as “faithless” electors. Due to “faithless” electors, nine electoral votes have been cast against instruction since 1820. Thankfully, none of these votes changed the outcome of any election.