Electoral System : A Primer For Decision Makers

For as long as American citizens can remember the assigned method of election for the United States presidency would be the use of the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a process not a place or institution, in this essay I will briefly describe the Electoral College process as well as describe some pros and cons of the electoral college and lastly, I will attempt to answer the controversial question, if you could improve the electoral college, would I choose to abolish or reform the system?

Many politicians argue that there is a need for institutional reform in the United States—the sole purpose of such reform should be to develop a more efficient system for the state as a whole. However, others argue that there are existing institutions in the United States that are structured efficiently. In order to help determine where an individual will stand on the debate about institutional reform, one must compare the effects of different forms of political institutions with the existing form in the United States. There are three new proposals of reform to discuss for the United States: 1) change in the electoral system for the House of Representatives, 2) change in the executive structure

The article, “Electoral College: An Overview,” written by Ballaro, Beverly, Bourassa, and Cheryl, explains how the electoral college is used and why people do not support it. This article targets anyone who is able to vote in the 2016 election. The purpose of this article is to inform voters that their vote does not always choose the president and explains how the president is chosen and the system behind it. The thesis of this article explains that many people abroad are still unaware that the president is not elected directly by the people. The president is chosen by the electoral college. The electoral college is a body of electors chosen to elect the president and vice president of the united states. This setup allows the chance for an

The voting process in America appears straightforward, but it is a very complex, complicated system. The Electoral College is America’s current voting system. The Electoral College still serves its intended purpose, but with increasing political activity among Americans it has caused a need to reform this process. Research suggests that the Electoral College system should be amended because it poorly illustrates democracy, is outdated and the majority of Americans are in favor of abolishing the system.

Every time there is an election in the United States, the debate of Electoral College always heats up, and suddenly everybody seems to know about or at least they are interested in learning about it. The Electoral College is firmly established under the United States Constitution to elect the president and the vice president of the United States indirectly. A slate of “electors” are chosen from each state, and they are the ones responsible for voting for president in the general elections depending on which party the candidate is vying with. From this statement, what it means is that one does not choose his or her preferred leader directly and this has made many suggestions that the Electoral College is not a true representation of democracy. This paper will look at the strongest arguments for and against the Electoral College, analyze whether the current Electoral College should be re-engineered or scrapped in favor of direct vote and finally determine if the Electoral College is consistent or contrary to democratic principle.

In this essay I will assess the outcomes of Additional Member system, First Past the Post system and the Closed Party List system. The F-P-T-P system is used to elect the members of House of Commons and local government in England and Wales. Voters select candidates, and do so by marking his or her name with an ‘X’ on the ballot paper. This reflects the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. The Additional Members system is used in Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, and Northern Ireland Assembly and Greater London assembly. It is a mixed system made up of F-P-T-P and party-list elements. The Regional party list (or the closed party list) is used to elect the

Our Founding Fathers’ idea of an Electoral College is not the same as our current Electoral College as amendments have changed their structure and function. Despite the changes and adaptations to our country’s changes, the Electoral College is still the method that selects presidents and vice presidents. Exploration of the structure and function of the Electoral College will provide an opportunity to understand its formation and operation while the debate between the Electoral College and popular vote usage and its effects on election results will provide an understanding of issues and misalignment with the popular vote while the understanding of how an individual’s vote is valued by the Electoral College will provide a clear demonstration that the vote informs the Electoral College for their duties.

Creating the Electoral College system proved trying because “the Founders struggled to satisfy each state’s demand for greater representation while attempting to balance popular sovereignty against the risk posed to the minority from majoritarian rule” (Destroying the Electoral College: The Anti-Federalist National Popular Vote Scheme). They overcame these difficulties and tried to satisfy both small and large states. The disagreement that paved the way for the Electoral College was whether Congress should choose the president or if the masses should vote. In the end, the three reasons for which the Electoral College was created were: to “work without political parties, cover both the nominating and electing phases of presidential selection, and produce a nonpartisan president” (American Government: Roots and Reform, O’Connor, Yanus, and Sabato). These essential rationales prove that the Electoral College cannot be done away with by amending the

A voter can be defined as an individual who votes, or has the right to vote, in elections. Voting behaviour is explained using the concepts of expressive voting and strategic voting. A rational voter would act more strategically, that is, the voter would vote to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to his or her own policy preferences, rather than voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology, or social group membership (expressive voting). Strategic voting has become more important than voting on the basis of political cleavages (expressive voting), so voters have become more rational in their approach, however there is always an element of expressiveness in their behaviour. Political parties were initially formed to represent the interests of particular groups in society however, as these parties became more universal in the appeal of their policy programmes, voting behaviour shifted from expressive to strategic. This essay explores the reasons behind the declining importance of political cleavages, and the rise of strategic voting.

It is difficult to completely understand and in a way appreciate what the Electoral College is if you don’t understand it. Therefore, this paper will go in depth as to how the voting process works in the United States, with a main focus on the Electoral College.  I will start by talking about the background, what challenges and problems it was trying to solve, how it came to be and who came up with such idea. Secondly, I would talk about the advantages the Electoral College possesses, such as it keeps small states as viable participants, it maintains division of power and how it’s beneficial to the candidates and their campaign. But as with everything, there are also some disadvantages that come with such, example, ignoring the will of the

Every country differs in their preference of political system to govern their countries. For democratic countries, two possible choices of governing are the presidential system and the parliamentary system. Since both the presidential and the parliamentary systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, many scholars have examined these two forms of government, and debate on which political system is more successful in governance. In this paper, I will first provide a detailed analysis of both the parliamentary and the presidential system. I will also evaluate each system’s strengths and weaknesses, addressing any differences as well as any commonalities. Finally, I will conclude by using historical examples to analyze and support the

For decades, Canadians have been defending their right to have a fair and open electoral system. Since its creation in 1867, Canada has been proud to call itself a true democratic country, but today there would be many people who disagree with this statement. The Canadian electoral system, which uses First Past The Post (FPTP), has come under scrutiny for not being as fair as it claims to be. Over the past couple of decades, many countries have switched their system to Proportional Representation (PR) or some form of it. Based on successful results in other nations, Canada’s current FPTP system should change to Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is a form of Proportional Representation, as it will allow for more fair elections. The intent of this paper is to outline how an electoral reform from First Past the Post to Proportional Representation or Mixed-Member Proportional, will lead to more confidence in the government, more accurate seat-vote percentage, and better overall representation of the population.

The discussion of the origins of electoral systems is an ongoing debate that many experts within the field of political science continue to contribute to, offering various perspectives of how electoral systems are established. Amongst the community of experts, there is a consensus that the origins of electoral systems are not attributed solely to a single casual factor. Rather than developing a theory that objectively details the origins of electoral systems, experts propose various explanations, such as historical, political or economic explanations, as the foundation through which electoral systems emerged. While a multitude of literature concerning the origins of electoral systems undoubtedly exists, this review will be looking at three articles in particular that were published in the American Political Science Review, Vol. 104, No. 2. The three articles under examination in this review are: “Historical Knowledge and Quantitative Analysis: The Case of the Origins of Proportional Representation” by Marcus Kreuzer, “Coevolution of Capitalism and Political Representation: The Choice of Electoral Systems” by Thomas Cusack, Torben Iversen and David Soskice (CIS), and “Electoral Markets, Party Strategies, and Proportional Representation” by Carles Boix. Each piece of literature being reviewed engages with existing literature to some degree, presents a main argument and presents evidence that supports its argument. Nonetheless, it is worth noting the Boix’s and CIS’s articles

Elections and electoral systems aim at converting the popular will expressed as votes into choices between candidates of political parties for political offices in the executive and legislature. The electoral system therefore reflects itself in the party system and the structure of governmental representation. This association between elections, parties and government takes different forms. Ideal electoral systems should comprise of competition, effective government, and fair representation along with free and fair voting.

It is not merely that different voting systems count votes differently, but that different voting-system arrangements alter the incentives that voters and parties face to do certain things: to vote for one party over another, to try to appeal to one group of voters over another, and so on (Pilon 12)6.