Should the Electoral College still be in place - Essay Example

Should the Electoral College still be in place? This particular paper would fundamentally highlight a thesis pertaining to the reasons why the voting system associated with the Electoral College is deemed to be an ineffective elective method for the 21st century and why primarily this particular presidential elective method can claim to cast the second most popular or to be precise an unpopular head of the state. The latter paper would also initially shed light of what the current electoral system corresponds to and how it works in selecting a potential candidate. This paper would give a clear picture as to why the current electoral system is an obsolete method of casting presidential votes for the state and how with the associated measures and amendments can this selective method be evolved. Furthermore this particular thesis again would look back through history for examples where the electoral system on current values have failed to provide a decision based on the unanimous most popular votes achieved and hence appoint office a candidate who significantly does not hold the peoples ideology in running the country. Lastly we would succumb to the fact that prior to twentieth century the electoral system of electing the president was made by people who were the pioneers of their time and society while keeping in mind the common educational awareness in a single voter and how this method would cancel dysfunctional voting which may not be in the best interest of the United States (Kimberling; Curry). For matters concerning the voting system upheld by the Electoral College, there have been, for the past two centuries, excessive debates that primarily highlight the loop holes associated with this form of presidential selection. Firstly before jumping in to the jargon of as to why the Electoral College of presidential elections deems a misfit in current society we would on first note take up to the fact that what practically is the Electoral system of voting that we all so often refer to. On theoretical counts the Electoral College system of voting to claim a new head of the state is a method in which electors from every state cast their votes on potential candidates that seek to become the next president so as such the electors hold the key of who becomes the new subsequent head of the state. The votes casted by the American citizens is only associated with the electors of their own state hence even though votes pertaining to a hundred percent favoring either the democrats or the republicans could only and fundamentally suffice for their own states electoral representatives(Glennon; Whittaker et al). The number of electoral reps that every state acquires is a directly proportional figure to the amount of people or residents residing in it and therefore the number of electoral reps in each state varies from one another. For instance Minnesota as being a relatively bigger state than Columbia has seven more electoral votes and hence stands to a 10 to 3 ratio in comparison. The total number of electoral votes situated is five hundred and thirty eight and hence to potentially win an election a candidate must receive more than or equal to two hundred and seventy uncontested votes and effectively claim a winning spot. The voting system in every state apart from Maine and Nebraska has a winner take all methodology on casting electoral votes as such if in any state the democratic or republic party get the majority votes then automatically the other residing votes which may not be in favor of the winning party would also be effectively transferred to the votes of the winning electoral reps. This particular policy has a major drawback concerning the fact that even though a candidate may win the most popular vote of the country it may eventually lose at the mercy of the Electoral college system. Again for instance the nominee from the democratic or republic party gets electoral votes from the majority of states but loses to small margins in larger ones like California, New York etc. then the on an aggregate vote basis the candidate would most likely lose the electoral campaign. Such were the cases counted in the history of the United States on four separate occasions in 1824, when popular vote winner Andrew Jackson lost the presidency to John Quincy Adams while in 1876, when Samuel Tilden lost to Rutherford B. Hayes the penultimate occasion of such a scenario came in 1888, when Grover Cleveland lost to Benjamin Harrison while the most recent example that can be fundamentally associated is the appointment of George Bush at office instead of Al Gore when due to the vote casting in the Florida state Al Gore lost from a very minimal margin. Even though as we can see that the Electoral system of presidential elections have run in on an obsolete encirclement and hence it is highly imperative that new and revised amendments be made to counteract these (DELL; Tara). By nature the electoral system of presidential elections is a law implemented system of running an election hence to counter act such measure would require law only law implemented amendments so that the overall theme remains the same while specific loop holes in the Electoral system be counter acted so as to fundamentally not have controversial decisions as in the case of Bush and Al Gore. It may also be imperative that we significantly look back to as to why our forefathers chose this weak election governance system and only when we thoroughly observe that we see that due to the fact that the country was literally slow in communication as roads, bridges and train services were not more than of basic value the common man was pretty much unaware of the presidential candidate that would be appointed to office after an election. They fundamentally disagreed on the fact that there be a winner take all elective method as due to the varying populations count every state would uphold to its own nominee and the state with the highest numeric residence would always win. In order to counter act such great issue the Electoral system was developed as the substitute for selecting the president through democratic means and therefore established an electoral college with representatives from all walks of life. Ideally these gentlemen were should be the pioneers of knowledge so as to best select a potential presidential candidate but as such a criteria is effectively achieved in the 21st century slate electors never disjoint their party loyalty and always select or press vote to their desired candidate even for the fact that he may not be the most appropriate man for the job (Ross). As such with all these problematic datum it is for a fact that revision in the electoral system may be needed as soon as possible and that new and revised amendments should always be implemented to make them on par with the current needs of society. References Kimberling, William C.. The electoral college. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse on Election Administration, Federal Election Commission, 1992. Print. Glennon, Michael J. When No Majority Rules: The Electoral College and Presidential Succession. Washington D.C.:Congressional Quarterly, 1992. Curry, Tom. "Is it time to scrap the Electoral College? - politics - Decision '08 | NBC News." Breaking News & Top Stories - World News, US & Local | NBC News. N.p., 21 Oct. 2008. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. . DELL, KRISTINA. "Electoral college explained - CNN." Featured Articles from CNN. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. . Whitaker, L. Paige, and Thomas H. Neale.The electoral college an overview and analysis of reform proposals. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2004. Print. Ross, Tara. "The Electoral College: Enlightened Democracy." Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. N.p., 1 Nov. 2004. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. . Read More