Should Electoral College Be Abolished Essay

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?

The Electoral College: a system that the U.S. has used over the years to choose representatives and is a compromise between election by a vote. The Electoral College should not be abolished for three reasons. These reasons are: The system helps candidates who struggle with winning the Popular Vote; with Electoral Votes, it gives the little states enough power and votes, and if we abolish The Electoral College, we weaken the Political Two-Party-System. And if not weakened, then destroyed. These reasons will show that the Electoral College should not be abolished, and should be kept.

What would you do if you didn't have a say in who runs America and how it is ran. What if you were promised freedom, and told that you had a government ran by the people but you didn’t get any input in the decisions? The direct popular vote doesn’t give the smaller parties a chance, but the electoral college does. Some people believe that the electoral college should be abolished; however, it gives people in rural communities a stronger voice, it allows the President a mandate to meet people’s needs in every state, and it reflects the political opinions of more Americans. Therefore, America should keep the electoral college.

The electoral vote allotment is based on the population of each state, collected from the census. This method of division leads to severe imbalances between the decisions of small states and the decisions of the larger states. In 2010, Alaska, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had a total amount of 44 electoral votes. Illinois, a single state, had 20. This means that one sole state had as many electoral votes as six states put together. While the electoral system is usually unfair to smaller states, in the case of ties, the larger states suffer the most. When the electoral vote is tied, each state can only cast one vote for the final decision, meaning that a “representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters,” according to Bradford Plumer, author of the article “The Indefensible Electoral College.” No matter what happens during the election, one group is always being cheated out of their rightful votes. The choice of our country’s leader should not be based on a system that is unfair to a specific group of voters simply due to their state

The validity and necessity of the Electoral College has been questioned approximately since it was formed in the Constitution. Many different events in history, such as the president having a vice president from the opposite party, and the electoral college electing a president that didn’t win the popular vote has caused this to be an area of controversy. After looking into the origin of this system, how it works, and societal and technological changes that have occurred in the past 200 years, one can see why the Electoral College isn’t needed in this day and age.

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).

What do you think the founding fathers thought about our citizens as voters? Shortly after the country’s government was formed, framers of the Constitutional Convention in 1787 did not believe that the People should directly decide who becomes the president of the United States. They made this decision because during 1787, the government was dealing with opinions from small and large states, and slave and free states. Now, though, all of the states have extremely similar rights and regulations, so I believe that there is no reason for the Electoral College to still exist. The question being answered here is whether or not the Electoral College should be abolished due to its effects on the People and

on whether or not it would be a good idea to keep the electoral college. Though

We can trace back the Electoral College to the 18th century when the United States was first founded by our Founding Fathers, when after our independence, we created a democracy that will give equal opportunities for the people and not give too much power to one person; therefore the Electoral College holds a great importance in our country’s political history. Located in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, this document states, “The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves…The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President…” Despite the importance of this process, many start to debate whether we should abolish the Electoral College or keep it. Some claim that, this process takes away the choice of an individual that votes for its candidate. While others claim that the Electoral College gives a fair chance to the voters that live in smaller states with less population. In order to make a clear decision. To make a clear judgment, one needs to go back and inform themselves on what is an Electoral College, understand why our Founding Fathers created this political role, know of their advantages and disadvantages as well to analyses wheatear this process is still necessary now in days.

It basically means that the will of the people of California (55 electors) is worth 18 times more than that of the people of Alaska (3 electors), and 11 times more than that of New Mexico (5 electors). [5] The Electoral College is arguably based on the premise that the Americans of some states are more fit to make the right choice than others, which could be seen as a generalization, especially taking into account their disproportional

The Electoral College was a well thought out compromise for the election process. Conversely, numerous Americans still argue that their votes do not count. Yet, without knowing it, Americans actually vote for electors when they vote for presidential candidates’, stated in an article from The Huffington Post. But who are the electors? How are they chosen? Why do their votes count, and ours do not? These are several questions several concerned citizens may be asking, and they will soon be answered. However, what most Americans should be concerned with is supporting their electors, because no matter how many popular votes a candidate receives, the Electoral College determines our

The Electoral College has become ineffective in the twenty-first century due to the advancement in technology and the progression in public education, allowing one to formulate a cultured opinion in today’s politics. Nevertheless, the decision to do so will positively affect the citizens and government relations; therefore, will cause America to become more democratic, improved country. However, if it is not abolished soon more elections, like 2000 and 2016, will occur, thus, an increased amount of distrust between the people and the government. Nevertheless, Americans are already divided and will result in new, larger problems in the future if the country’s leader is unable to bring his or her people together. Therefore, Electoral College is only causing problems in America’s democratic process rather than solutions that will only escalate from today

The electoral college is an outdated rigid system of voting for president made by the founding fathers of America. In 1787 the constitutional convention approved the federal Electoral College System based on the lack of education of the colonial people on politics. Times have changed and people are more familiar with the political system. Presidential candidates promote their campaigns through social media, television and news articles which allows people to gain knowledge of the candidates and their presidential duties, themselves instead of relying on elected officials to make the decision for them. The electoral college should be abolished for reasons of it disenfranchising the people, unconstitutionally defying the 14th amendment, popular sovereignty, and

First and foremost, it grants minor states the power they need to make a difference. Instead of a popular vote, the electoral college divides it’s 538 electors amongst states by population. Moreover, to ensure this counter-idea, 3 supplementary votes are awarded to each state. This insures that states like Wyoming or Vermont are not neglected over immenser sates like Texas or California; authorizing there interests and needs to be just as significant. Hans Hassel, a politics professor, once stated the following, “The Electoral College really provides an option for people in states like Iowa to make a difference, and, as an Iowan, I think that’s important.” Likewise, when Raul Labrador was questioned about the efficiency and quality of electoral

The final fundamental problem with the Electoral College is its’ violations of political equality. In his article “Why the Electoral College Is Bad For America” for the Yale University Press (YUP), George C. Edwards goes on to illustrate how fundamentally non-neutral a counting device the electoral college is. For example, if one were to win 12 states, and the District of Columbia, with the fewest electoral votes, you would be handed 44 votes. On the other hand, if you were to win the state of Illinois, a state endowed with 20 electoral votes, and a population as of 2004 of 12,830,632, you would still not have as much as you would’ve if you had won those twelve state. The major problem in this system is that combined those areas have 329,910 less people then Illinois, illustrating that in the convoluted and complex system that is the college, size of population is by no means a guarantee of a state's significance in the Electoral