Electoral College Should Not Be President-Elect
When voting for a President and Vice President, Americans are actually voting for presidential electors, generally known as the electoral college. It is these electors who actually vote to elect the chief executive. Each state has a specific number of electors equal to the combined total of the state’s Senate and House of Representatives delegations. There is currently a combined total of 538 electors.
It is relatively easy to become an elector because “Aside from Members of Congress, and persons holding offices of ‘Trust or Profit’ under the Constitution, anyone may serve as an elector.” (Staff, History.com.) It’s important that we know what decisions are being made and to know who’s making those decisions for our country.
Electors are nominated by their respective political …show more content…
party. In each presidential election year, “a group of candidates for elector is nominated by political parties and other groupings in each state, usually at a state party convention, or by the party state committee.” (Staff, History.com.) Electors are nominated by political parties, rather than people who are already in positions of power. Parties nominate their own electors, rather than having someone pick for them.
Electors have a choice in who they vote for, regardless of who their state represents, such as being “pledged and expected, but not required, to vote for the candidates they represent.” (Staff, History.com.) This gives electors the choice to vote for who they honestly feel is the better candidate, not based on the political party that their state represents regularly. This could sway the election in a different direction than expected.
In a recent survey by Morning Consult +Politico, 45% of people surveyed said we should “Amend the Constitution to replace the Electoral College with the popular vote, where the candidate with the most votes nationally wins the presidency”, while only 40% said we should “Keep the Electoral College and the current way we elect presidents”.
The other 15% had no opinion. (Morning Consult + Politico)
By playing sides, electoral college tries to represent the state as a whole, based on the popular vote. Electoral College should not be used to determine the President-elect because the system fails to represent the country as a whole.
The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College for reasons that are no longer relevant in the election process. The Founding Fathers created the Electoral college to prevent the direct election of the President and to make sure the President-elect is qualified. Electors used to be seen as “free from any sinister bias” (Hamilton), but are now chosen by their political parties and expected to vote accordingly, regardless of their own opinion. Many laws, that have limited or prevented direct democracy, have been changed, so why shouldn’t the electoral college be
changed?
The Presidential election has put too much power into “swing states” and, this year, has been decided by a handful of states. Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia have all been considered as “swing states” in the 2016 Presidential Election. This means that, in past elections, these states have not been consistent in which political party wins the state, or they have been exceptionally close in the popular vote.
Electoral College doesn’t represent the people. Ever since the popular vote started to be recorded in 1824, the United States has had five presidential elections, in which the candidate with the greater amount of popular votes lost. Andrew Jackson (1824), Samuel Tilden (1876), Grover Cleveland (1888), Al Gore (2000), and Hillary Clinton (2016) were all victims to flaws in the electoral college system. The people elected them, the system elected their opponents, and the system won.
A common argument against this position is that electoral college, for the most part, has done well representing most of the country, but “most” of the country is not all of the country, and to be fair on an issue as critical as the presidential election, all of the voting population must be represented. Some, while defending the electoral college, argue that “The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting the President of the United States.” (ProCon.org) But, by saying “parts”, they mean states, and not individual people. In the recent 2016 election, the President-elect, Donald Trump, received 2,865,075 fewer votes, but was still declared the victor. This is because of the electoral college system. 2,865,075 votes that didn’t matter. 2,865,075 people that didn’t matter. 2,865,075 people who tried to help. 2,865,075 votes that weren’t represented, and 1 very flawed system. By representing whole states and not everyone’s individual vote, the system fails to be accurate in which candidate becomes elected.
We, the people of the United States, are obligated as a country to make the voting system as upright and as honest as possible. I hope this has opened your eyes to the inequitable system that is the electoral college, and I hope you understand that, if you want your vote to matter, as an individual, you better start fighting for what’s right by helping abolish the Electoral College.
It is relatively easy to become an elector because “Aside from Members of Congress, and persons holding offices of ‘Trust or Profit’ under the Constitution, anyone may serve as an elector.” (Staff, History.com.) It’s important that we know what decisions are being made and to know who’s making those decisions for our country.
Electors are nominated by their respective political …show more content…
party. In each presidential election year, “a group of candidates for elector is nominated by political parties and other groupings in each state, usually at a state party convention, or by the party state committee.” (Staff, History.com.) Electors are nominated by political parties, rather than people who are already in positions of power. Parties nominate their own electors, rather than having someone pick for them.
Electors have a choice in who they vote for, regardless of who their state represents, such as being “pledged and expected, but not required, to vote for the candidates they represent.” (Staff, History.com.) This gives electors the choice to vote for who they honestly feel is the better candidate, not based on the political party that their state represents regularly. This could sway the election in a different direction than expected.
In a recent survey by Morning Consult +Politico, 45% of people surveyed said we should “Amend the Constitution to replace the Electoral College with the popular vote, where the candidate with the most votes nationally wins the presidency”, while only 40% said we should “Keep the Electoral College and the current way we elect presidents”.
The other 15% had no opinion. (Morning Consult + Politico)
By playing sides, electoral college tries to represent the state as a whole, based on the popular vote. Electoral College should not be used to determine the President-elect because the system fails to represent the country as a whole.
The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College for reasons that are no longer relevant in the election process. The Founding Fathers created the Electoral college to prevent the direct election of the President and to make sure the President-elect is qualified. Electors used to be seen as “free from any sinister bias” (Hamilton), but are now chosen by their political parties and expected to vote accordingly, regardless of their own opinion. Many laws, that have limited or prevented direct democracy, have been changed, so why shouldn’t the electoral college be
changed?
The Presidential election has put too much power into “swing states” and, this year, has been decided by a handful of states. Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia have all been considered as “swing states” in the 2016 Presidential Election. This means that, in past elections, these states have not been consistent in which political party wins the state, or they have been exceptionally close in the popular vote.
Electoral College doesn’t represent the people. Ever since the popular vote started to be recorded in 1824, the United States has had five presidential elections, in which the candidate with the greater amount of popular votes lost. Andrew Jackson (1824), Samuel Tilden (1876), Grover Cleveland (1888), Al Gore (2000), and Hillary Clinton (2016) were all victims to flaws in the electoral college system. The people elected them, the system elected their opponents, and the system won.
A common argument against this position is that electoral college, for the most part, has done well representing most of the country, but “most” of the country is not all of the country, and to be fair on an issue as critical as the presidential election, all of the voting population must be represented. Some, while defending the electoral college, argue that “The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting the President of the United States.” (ProCon.org) But, by saying “parts”, they mean states, and not individual people. In the recent 2016 election, the President-elect, Donald Trump, received 2,865,075 fewer votes, but was still declared the victor. This is because of the electoral college system. 2,865,075 votes that didn’t matter. 2,865,075 people that didn’t matter. 2,865,075 people who tried to help. 2,865,075 votes that weren’t represented, and 1 very flawed system. By representing whole states and not everyone’s individual vote, the system fails to be accurate in which candidate becomes elected.
We, the people of the United States, are obligated as a country to make the voting system as upright and as honest as possible. I hope this has opened your eyes to the inequitable system that is the electoral college, and I hope you understand that, if you want your vote to matter, as an individual, you better start fighting for what’s right by helping abolish the Electoral College.