Should Electoral College Be Abolished Research Paper

Some people may believe that having the electoral college takes away the rights and needs of the states, but it does the complete opposite; it allows the president to meet the state’s needs and give them the power that is promised “The Electoral College makes sure that the states count in the presidential elections. As such, it is an important part of our federalist system...”(Document C). Document C shows us that the states are represented and have been represented for centuries due the to system in which certain powers are given to the states in order to keep the federal government in check. Consequently our states rely on the Electoral College to

There are several people within the states that have the power to chose the President. There is a system to help it is called Electoral College. People would vote as normal and then all the votes for the state would determine the states candidate. This can help or hurt the the people for the opposing candidate. There need to be changes to the Electoral College and how many electoral votes are determined.

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?

Most states are always republican or democratic in the way they vote. So the amount of votes is already in favor of one candidate or another before voting actually arrives.(Document 7). Since the candidates are always insured a certain number of votes, the candidates only have to worry about “swing states” or states that change their decisions every election. Since the non-swing states never decide in favor of one candidate or the other by themselves the power to elect a new president resides with whom the citizens of swing states vote for. Without an electoral college, each citizen's vote would be worth more and everyone could help determine a new president instead of the select few who are living in “swing states.” All of these reasons help to make it clear that the electoral college is a corrupt

But as we cleared what was one of the biggest hurdles that forced the creation of the electoral college (Lack of technology to keep up with politics and candidates effectively), there is no purpose of one. Too many times has this system that is supposed to fairly decide our president failed because presidents won despite American people voting for their opponent. This system is proven to be inherently flawed, and especially after this election it is time to consider a new system of election our next presidents. When we put our faith in mysterious electors who aren’t even obligated to respect our voting preference, we lose an integral piece of democracy. We lose the voice of the

Your vote should mainly matter! Yes, the electoral college should be abolished. The delegates did not believe the president should be chosen by a direct population vote (of the people). They didn’t trust voters would have enough information to make a good choice. The Electoral College is where the president and vice president are chosen indirectly. This system is where all states and the District of Columbia get one electoral vote for each of their US senators and representatives. Also, each state has a slate of electors for each presidential candidate. Another way this system works is by winner-take all method. The winner-take all method is where whichever candidate wins the most votes in the state, wins the state electoral votes. Lastly a candidate must receive a majority (one more than a half) of the electoral votes to be declared president. That is how everything goes in the electoral college. The electoral college should be abolished because 12 states and D.C. total have double the amount of electoral votes but less people than Illinois. Also, the winner of the 1876 presidential election isn’t what people wanted, it was based on the number of electoral votes. Another reason the electoral college should be abolished is that the states with the same representatives dont have the same number of voters. All these issues that continue to happen, need to be resolved by getting rid of this system.

One of the reason why the Electoral College should not be destroyed, is that it helps the candidates who may struggle with the popular vote. In 1980, for Presidential Election, candidate Ronald Reagan barely won the popular vote (50.7%). With the help of the Electoral Vote, Reagan took 91% of it, which then made him the winner (Doc B). Also in 1992, Candidate Bill Clinton, did not even have half the country on his side (43%). With the help of the Electoral Vote, Clinton

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).

First, The Electoral College prevents majority rule and should not be abolished. ”The Electoral College gives states with small populations a measure of protection against domination by states with large populations. It levels the political playing field a bit” (Williams, Walter E.). It is said that Hillary Clinton won popular vote majority. Therefore, if the nation were not encumbered with outdated electoral college. Clinton, instead of our present one, would be the next president of the United States. In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote just as Clinton supposedly did. Such outcomes have led to calls to desert the Constitution's Article two provisions for the state electors to select presidents. Before the U.S. deserts the Electoral College, let's consider the purpose it performs. According to 2013 Census Data, Nine states- California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, and Michigan have populations

When the Electoral College was put in place as part of the voting process it seemed a good idea. “Our framers distrusted democracy and saw the Electoral College as a deliberative body able to correct bad choices made by the people.” (Anderson 519). Times have changed and today’s society is a lot different that it was when George Washington was President. It’s about time that the U.S eliminates the Electoral College and makes America more of a democracy by making the popular vote the deciding factor in electing the president.

Democratic theorist, Robert Dahl once said, “…every member must have an equal and effective opportunity to vote, and all votes must be counted as equal.” This quote greatly summarizes what the Electoral College system means; every person in the United States is guaranteed one vote. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to elect who serves in the government, and we are given that opportunity through this system. This is what the Founding Fathers came up with in order to solve the problems they faced over 200 years ago. However, some have opposed this system is not fit for this democracy, and argue that other systems would work more fairly. On the contrary, I strongly believe that the Electoral College system should be kept because it is the fairest way to elect the President.

We will first understand why the electoral college should be abolished because it causes unnecessary confusion in which a tie is possible between the candidates. A perfect example is the presidential election of 2000 where the candidate with 500,000 more popular votes, Al Gore, lost the election due to the electoral college. The reason being that one elector refused to vote for Gore and the suspicious voter count in Florida that would be considered voter fraud today. The country was in great uncertainty over the next few months after the election because many supporters of Al Gore rightly said that Al Gore should have won the presidency. Al Gore ended up with 266 electoral votes, George H.W. Bush with 271, and one elector who should have voted for Gore abstained from voting. This unnecessary confusion

Since voting power is determined by each state’s population, many of the smaller states are at a disadvantage. The states with small populations have little say in the election . The states get a minimum of three votes since “A state can never have fewer than three electors”(Document A). However, in a larger election with 538 votes, three votes is next to nothing. The map in Document A shows how many of the less populated states have around 3-6 vote. Even if the small states all teamed up, they still would not beat the bigger states like California who has 55 votes. A

Voting for a president makes us feel like we actually have a part in our government, but what if that wasn't true. Abolishing the Electoral college is necessary for our government to be fair. How is it possible that a candidate can win with the majority of the people disliking him? At the beginning of our government we strived for equality, that is why small states were given the same representation as large states. The difference in populations is colossal. The largest state california with a total population of 39.25 million (2016) (Doc F) while the smallest state Wyoming( Doc D) with a population of only 582,658. It is shocking how in the house of senate they are given the same representation. We should definitely abolish the Electoral college because it is undemocratic and is not in the best interest of the people, small states have too much power, and it doesn't give third parties a fair opportunity to run for president.

First, The Electoral College prevents majority rule and should not be abolished. ”The Electoral College gives states with small populations a measure of protection against domination by states with large populations. It levels the political playing field a bit” (Williams, Walter E.). It is said that Hillary Clinton won popular vote majority. Therefore, if the nation were not burdened with antiquated electoral college. She, instead of donald trump, would be the next president of the United States. In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote just as Clinton supposedly did. Such outcomes have led to calls to abandon the Constitution's Article two provisions for the state electors to select presidents. Before we abandon the Electoral College, let's consider the functions it performs. According to 2013 Census Data, Nine states- California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, and Michigan have populations that totally roughly