Electoral College System in the US - Essay Example

Electoral College System in the United s After the United s of America break from the British monarchical leadership, the free white citizens with property of the country had power and authority to elect their leader. At this time, the states had the power to choose their elector who had the responsibility of electing the president. However, only two states held the election in 1789 these were Maryland and Pennsylvania. Each elector had two votes for the office the president. The majority winner become president and the runners up was automatically the vice president. The twelfth amendment requires one vote for vice president and one for president by the electors also known as the Electoral College. The amendment provides room for the electoral process in case the electors failed to choose the president by majority. Each state had a number of electors that were same as the number of the state representatives in the upper and lower houses of the legislature. In 1969, the District of Columbia gets for the first time number of elector equal to the least populous state elector’s by the 23rd Amendment. The electors person's choice is from the states they represent by a populous vote that translates to the presidential candidate they favor in the end. There have been many attempts to change the system, but none has been useful. The states organize the elector’s elections where congress determines the dates. Some of the attempts that have been successful include Nebraska and Maine give two votes to the overall winner in the states and one vote for congressional district winner. The system of the presidential election termed as Electoral College system establishment is in the year 1804 after the 12th amendment of article II of the constitution. The main factors that influenced the creation of the system were to ensure that each state gets a fair say in who is their president. The electors were the rich land owners of the time and had to be white. To create a solution should any of the candidates fail to get a win of 270 populous elector’s votes. This scenario arises when the electors who pledge to vote for a given candidate vote otherwise as they are not bound to their promise by the constitution. The House of Representatives resolves this stalemate. The pros of the system include it enhances national cohesion in the country and ensures that distributing the populous president decision all over the country. The system also ensures that there is political stability by enhancing the two political party system (Bickel. 56). The people against the system argue that the system provides a leeway for a candidate to win the nationwide election and lose the electoral vote. The critics justify their argument by the events that happened in the year 2000 when republican George Bush lost the populous vote and went ahead to win the electoral vote. His opponent Al Gore won the populous vote but, lost the electoral vote. In the end Bush, become the president. The critics say the system gives a leeway to election of a minority leader. They argue President George W. Bush was a minority leader but went ahead to gevern the country four those four years. This leader will not protray the Nation's free will as a few individuals that have a free will on whom to elect into office elected him into office. The minority leader increases the risk of dividing the nation into half. Most of the people will not have faith into his leadership regime. This may trigger mass protest and derail the economy of the nation. Critics point to the possibility that the Electoral College discouraging voter turnout in many states. Critics’ argue since the college has the mandate to elect the president then, the voters may after all leave the decision to the college and boy court elections. This will be a big setback in democracy as people will feel to be denied their constitutional mandate to elect the leader of their choice. Many republicans in the current states where they rule are aiming to change Electoral College system where the winner takes it all and the electors system where it is by congressional districts (Hunt 14). These legislators are pushing this agenda using government machinery available to them in order to serve their party interests. The current chair of the party Mr. Reince Priebus is encouraging them by keeping gag. The states that are pushing for the changes include Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Top on their agenda is that they want the system scrapped off, and the use of the popular vote effected. Hover, this will come with some repercussions, as prolonged vote counting time. The legislators in Virginia proposed a bill to change the way the states award its electoral votes. This is from the current system winner take it all to award by portions that are based on congressional districts. Their main drive is the fact that despite controlling most districts, the democrats takes all the electoral votes. The republican move to change the system in Virginia is enacted; it would give their presidential candidate Mr. Romney a win in Virginia by having the largest number of congressional districts (Hunt 14). The system if adapted nationwide will give their presidential candidate more advantage as the democrat voter leave in densely populated districts. This is unlike the Republicans who are widely spread in many states all over the country giving them more electoral votes. Critics of College Electorate system affiliated with the republicans argue that if the congressional district system of awarding the electorate then President Obama would have won by just 30 electorate college votes and not 126 (Wasserman). However, their argument is political since it is mainly aimed at ensuring the democrats clinch the presidential position in the elections. Politicians in Pennsylvania are plotting to change the College Electoral System at it home birthplace. However, these changes will deter this state from the norm, in all other states in the country. This is in terms of the winner takes it all, The state is planning to change the system of allocating the electorate vote by districts. This could have saved the presidential ambitions of Richard Nixon. He lost to J. Kennedy in 1960 by a mere 0.2% despite having the majority states and districts (Will). The current system is oppressive to such leaders and has cost them the presidential elections win. The current system neglects the third parties as the winner takes it all. However, if the Pennsylvania proposal if adopted all over the country, a third party will cherry pick congress districts that they enjoy popularity leaving the congress to pick the president as per the current system. The changes are a plot for the Republican Party to ensure that it wins the presidential elections. Their strategy is to hide in the words that they are bringing democracy to all states but, in real since creating a highway to ensure they are always in leadership. George will in his article brings these facts to light in his article and advices the republicans to give the current system a chance (Will). George will bring to light the facts that the Republican argument to change the current electoral system in the country is political and misplaced. This argument might cost them more votes than the political gains they aim to get. Some of the republican supporters do not support the aim of the change and strongly oppose this move. The system that they propose is aimed at ensuring that they clinch the presidential elections, and it does not favor the country. If the system is enacted, it will bring complications in choosing the president. Some of the republican politicians have openly faulted the proposed system warning that it might work against the party. George will argues that the proposed changes will not only have an impact on the republicans’ but also affect the third parties. The third parties will gunner electoral votes in the new system all over the country. The reparations will be sending the prime decision of choosing the president to the senate. When the decision reaches the senate stage, it takes time for the vote to be cast. This will delay the president ascending to the office and instead of people celebrations in the streets there might be mass demonstration. A candidate may be not certisfied with the decision and go to court delaying more the president ascending into office. The current College Electoral System is adequate to the country needs and fair to all political parties. At the beginning of the race, all parties have an equal chance to rally support and win the majority vote as well as electoral vote. In light to this fact there is no need for a party to look for short cuts to ascend to power. This short cut at the long run harms more the nation than the good the republican’s intent to bring to a given party. It is important to look at the good of the electoral system and weigh against the shortcomings in the system. The argument should not be political and look like it is a ragging of war between the democrats and the republicans. In the end, the good outweigh the shortcomings in the system. The system fosters unity in the country by controlling the number of political parties and ensuring the interest of the minority is evident in the presidency. The republicans should restructure their political manifesto and sell it to the people in order to clinch the presidency. Instead of using a strategy that threatens to oppress the minority and bite, them back in the future. Electoral College System for electing the president is adequate and deserves support from all quarters of the political divide. Works Cited Bickel., Alexander M. Reform and Continuity. New York: Harper & Row, 1971. Hunt, Albert R. "Changing the Path to the Presidency." New York Times 28 January 2013: 14. Wasserman, David. The Cook Political Report. Political Report. New York: New York Times, 2013. Will, George. "GPO aims to subvert the Electrol College." Staten Island Advance 10 October 2011. Read More