Pros And Cons Of Abolishing The Electoral College

Should The Electoral College Be Abolished?

In the year 1787, the new nation of the United States set up an electoral system in order to ensure that the federal elections that would soon be taking place in the young country would go over smoothly… This system was the Electoral College… If this system sounds familiar, it’s because the Electoral College is still in service today, currently acting as the system which selects the American President and Vice President, or to be more broad, the Executive Branch. The Electoral College has sparked more than it’s fair share of controversy over the years, with debate among both the American Public and the American Government being frequent and loud. Many are even calling for the system to be abolished, citing examples of European and Asian electoral systems as a far superior alternative to the current system. Well, should it be abolished...? Quite frankly, yes…

The electoral college works as such: Every American citizen (In theory) puts forward one ballot in the respective state they live in. On this ballot, the individual votes for a Presidential Ticket, United States Senator (If the state’s Senate Election falls on a election year), State Judicial Representative, State Senator(s),
State Treasurer, and State Secretary Of State. For every other position besides the Presidential Ticket, the election is determined by popular vote. The Presidential Ticket, on the other hand, is determined by the electors from a state where a candidate wins the popular vote. Let me explain… Every state in the union gets a certain number of electoral votes based on population-census data, of which is updated every ten years. So, for example, the State of California, with a population of 39.14 Million People, has a total of 55 Electoral votes, while the state of West Virginia, containing a total 1.8 Million People, has a respective five electoral votes. These electoral votes determine the winner based on the respective number of the electoral votes each candidate receives (A total of 270 Electoral Votes is needed to win. If one candidate does not win 270 Electors, the election is thrown to the senate.)... Sounds simple, right? Well… Well, you see there's a few major problems with that…

First off, the electors aren’t actually inanimate objects that are simply given to the candidate that wins the state in which these electors are located, no, they are in fact people, people whom are elected to become electors. The problem with that is that these electors are not forced to put forward their electoral vote for the candidate that takes victory within their home state, and can simply choose another candidate if they wish, meaning that, if the electoral vote is close enough, the rouge electors can flip the election... Now, all though these rouge electors, referred to as “Faithless Electors”, have never flipped an election in American history, the possibility that they can is enough.

Next is possibly the largest problem: The electoral vote can override the popular vote… According to the LA Times, the electoral college has overridden the popular vote five times.
These were four times were Adams vs Jefferson in 1824, Hayes vs Tilden in 1876, Harrison vs Cleveland in 1888, Bush vs Gore in 2000, and most recently Trump vs Clinton in 2016… Now, with this being said, the problem should be apparent. The simple fact that, in a democracy, it is the will of the people, all of the people, that is meant to be followed, and a system in which a small group of individuals can override this will of the nation’s citizens should have never have been implemented in the first place, let alone remain intact to the modern
day.

Now, many may present a counterargument to this conclusion, be it the fact that the electoral college was originally intended to prevent a madman from getting into office, or the fact that it theoretically will stop a few major cities and population centers from deciding every election, these arguments are simply irrelevant in the modern day, or happening anyway… For example, the election of 2000, of which is possibly the most controversial of the early 21st Century (More on that later), resulted in the election being thrown to the Supreme Court after the Republican Nominee, George W. Bush, won the state of Florida, of which broke the near electoral tie between himself and the Democratic Nominee, Al Gore. Reason being the fact that several voting irregularities had been reported in the state, where George Bush’s brother, John “Jeb” Bush, was Governor… In the end, the election was gifted to Bush. However, Gore still won the popular vote, which caused massive disdain among the Democratic Voters. Now, due to the fact that one single state determined the election, it is extremely important to note that if a Popular Vote System was operational within the United States, Al Gore would have been elected president in the year 2000, and possibly later in 2004. More recently, in 2016, Republican Donald J. Trump won the electoral college, while losing the popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton (Who herself was dealing with election controversy over the 2016 Democratic Primaries). This was primarily due to three major “Swing States” (states that are not solidly Democratic or Republican) in the Midwestern United States, these states being Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. In the months since, massive protests have begun not just within the United States, but across the globe do to these results… So, already, a few major cities and states already determine the election, and, again, if a Popular Vote system was in place in the United States, Hillary Clinton would currently be President.

To the second point, a “madman” has already been elected in the United States. Twice. George W. Bush in 2000, and Donald J. Trump in 2016… President Bush would end up leading the United States into a war in Iraq, of which is still ongoing (Be it in a different form) today. Not only that, but the continued policy of bank deregulation and tax cuts for the top 1% of the population led to the financial crash of 2008 and the subsequent housing bubble that followed… President Trump, on the other hand, has already taken several actions that have further damaged the United States, not to mention his childlike demeanor and easily swayed political opinions only seem to make us an embarrassment to the global community. To name some of the actions he has taken: Implementing a ban against all muslims entering the country from “High-Risk” countries (Many of which have either little or no history of supplying terrorist operatives to the United States), raising taxes on middle-class first time home buyers (On his first day in office, no less), and launching a cruise-missile strike against the nation of Syria under the Government of Bashar Al Assad, whom, although facing accusations of using chemical weapons against Rebels and Civilians, is still currently under United Nations Investigation (Although this investigation is severely lacking effort, at best). The last action had the possibility to spark a war against the nation of Russia, who’s fighter jets were not only in the country, but were actually stationed at the airbase where the airstrike was conducted. This all could have been circumvented by one thing: Abolishing the Electoral College.