Presidential Execor System: The Presidential Elector System

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 Electoral College is an excuse of the electoral process, proving itself to be undemocratic, false in representation, and harmful to third-parties. Therefore, the Electoral College should be abolished, and the process should rely on the popular vote to have the leading judgement in the election procedure for a new president. The Electoral College has proven that a candidate may not need to win the popular vote of the people of the nation in order to win the presidential election. But first, beforehand, let me introduce the system in which the Electoral Process is based upon. The Electoral Process is the government’s created system of indirect voting in order to elect the nation’s president.

The second idea was for the state legislatures to select the president, this option was denied because it raised concerns that the President may drawback to heavily on federal authority because it would be at the hand of the states, which were not huge supporters at the time of centralized government. Finally they proposed that a direct popular vote be held, but this was denied for multiple reasons. One reason being that the states would not have the communication tools to be sufficiently informed on the candidates overall and would just choose the favorite from their own state or region, without a factual base for doing so, another being that the large states would have a significant advantage over small states.

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.

A debate has been brewing in recent years about the way we elect our president. The first system is the Electoral College which is very complicated. Americans are not knowledgeable about it and worry that one candidate can win the popular vote and not the Electoral College. The opponents of the Electoral College propose a new plan called the National Popular Vote (NPV). The pro-Electoral College party think the bill’s risks and costs are not worth the possibility of some gains for certain states.

Most Americans think the Electoral College is a nuanced and complex system designed to safeguard democracy. It seems that dividing electoral votes among states and awarding each state's electors to one of the primary candidates would be an effective system and one that would preserve our nation’s freedom. And so society blissfully forges on believing our current system of election is both impartial and up to date. But little do most American citizens know that they are lacking the knowledge and context to understand how malignant the Electoral College is. The Electoral College needs to be abolished because it ignores the popular vote and what most citizens want, it causes candidates to focus too much on swing states, and the old reasons for using are now irrelevant.

In June of 1804 the states had ratified the Twelfth Amendment which enacted the Electoral College in time for the 1804 election. When election time comes, Americans vote for the President and Vice President who are chosen by Presidential electors, who as a whole are known as the Electoral College. As a decision was needed for a method of choosing candidates, the Constitutional Convention of 1787 contemplated many different ways of electing the President, but toward the end of the proposals and ideas the matter had to be taken to the Committee of Eleven on Postponed Matters which is the committee who conceived the original Electoral College. In recent years, much debate has been stirring regarding whether or not the Electoral College has a place within this country's elections. For many states this method of tallying and casting votes is great because every state receives a minimum of three electoral votes considering each state has two senators and at least one representative (Lewis). However, these minimum electoral votes make the distribution of electoral college votes uneven throughout the fifty states, making each American citizen's vote count less or much more which is cause for change. If the information on these weighted votes is analyzed it can be concluded that states with a population similar to Wyoming has one “elector” for every 177, 556 persons while Texas has one “elector” for every 715,499 persons. While the Electoral College has worked for generations, there are some negative factors that give cause to abolish this practice, such that are; faithless electors, the winner take all system, and finally, safe and swing states.

The electoral college, per Wikipedia, is a mechanism set up to select the president and vice president of the United States. (The Electoral college, 2016) It was during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that the founders established Article 2. Article 2 Section 1 details the innerworkings of the executive branch of government. The constitution states, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress”. (The Constitution of the United States, n.d.) The framers of the Constitution had many different ideas about how the selection of our president should go but ultimately

As the pillars of the electoral college collapse under the tests of time, the institution itself becomes obsolete. First, the concept of, “Winner Takes All,” means that if an election splits 49%-51%, then the smaller party’s votes are virtually erased. This system represents only the majority party in each state, thus effectively silencing all other parties. Additionally, basing the number of electors on the members in both houses of Congress creates an unequal distribution of votes across the states. Due to their infamously low population, Wyoming should statistically have only one elector, but the addition of their two senators brings them to a total of three electors. This means that each of Wyoming’s votes represents less people than every other state. For instance, each of Texas’s 38 votes represents 733,157 people while each of Wyoming’s votes represents 195,157 people. Therefore, the votes of the people of Wyoming are worth 26.62% more than that of Texans. The inequality of voting power between states combined with the “winner take all” system method of tallying votes projects an inaccurate portrayal of will of the American people.

The outcome of the 2016 election left many Americans feeling confused, angry, cheated, and terrified of the future. Somehow, the sexist, racist, homophobic candidate Donald Trump had become the nation’s president, though Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton received the majority of popular vote. This raised many questions over the constitutionality of the Electoral College system, and whether it was unfair to the people of the United States. In the electoral system, created by the Founding Fathers due to their lack of trust in the people, the constituents of each state vote for their preferred candidate, and all of the state’s electoral votes go to the candidate with a majority. Clearly, the Electoral

The possibility also existed of the each state legislature voting for only one of their state's “favorite sons”. This could lead to no single candidate winning a majority, thus no president selected. Finally, an indirect election of the president through a College of Electors was proposed. The original idea was to have the most informed individuals from each state select the president. They were to base their decision solely on merit without regard to state of origin or political party of the candidates. The elector system was voted down twice, once as the electors to be chosen by each state legislature and the other as the electors to be chosen by direct vote. It passed under a compromise that granted the individual states the power to decide how to choose their electors(Peirce 44).

In the “Point: Abolishing the Electoral College,” Benjamin Bolinger, a licensed lawyer who can practice law in Colorado and Pennsylvania, argues that the Electoral College needs to be abolished for the American democracy. Bolinger examines that some states with a little population have large number of electoral college compare to those states with larger populations. He believes that the Electoral College damages the value of democratic government by leaving

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

Consider the populations of Alaska and California, 700,000 and 37,000,000 people respectively (Census 2010); incorporating their electoral power of three and 55, a simple inference that Alaska owns approximately one electoral vote per 233,000 residents and California owns one electoral vote per 673,000 residents can be made (Gossett 1970). This basic calculation essentially means the vote of an Alaskan is worth close to three times as much as a Californian vote. Additionally, this unequal value of a citizen’s vote combined with states disparate voter turnout rates further exacerbates the aggregate inequality of votes. Clearly imbalanced in modern times, the Electoral College is an institution in dire need of

I am Nicholas Benefield, a fourteen year old Boy Scout of Troop 65 (Long Beach) and a member of the Tribe of Tahquitz (an honor scout organization). The course of this letter relies on my pronounced interest sparked in a school debate questioning or affirming the electoral system. Due to the natural but unethical form of this election and its candidates, countless citizens question their desire or need to vote if their vote might lay even a finger upon our electoral college. In this understanding, no negative response to a system of voting that has lasted over two centuries is needed if adjustments to a system designed for an completely different society are endeavoured upon. Those adjustments need to be a congressional district plan, just as Maine and Nebraska have it, with the candidate who wins the state majority popular vote wins the Senate electoral votes and the winner of the majority of the popular vote of each congressional district sends one of their electors