Should Electoral College be Replaced - Term Paper Example

Electoral College The current Electoral College that is used to determine the winner of a presidential election should not be replaced with the direct popular votes’ system. Currently, in case of the U.S. elections when citizens vote, they do not vote directly for the presidential candidate but instead they vote for a slate of electors to be included in the Electoral College (Hewson, 2002). These electors have a single vote for each of them that is used to determine who is to be the President. There has been a controversy about whether we should continue with this system or whether it should be replaced with the direct popular voted system. Since there is proportional representation of the states in the Electoral College, this institution becomes able to safeguard the interests of people living in the small states. Using this system, for a person to become the President of the United States he/she needs not only to be popular among the majority of the citizens but also should be popular in a vast number of the states. He/she, therefore, has to campaign in all states irrespective of the size or population in those states. However, due to the proportionate aspect of electoral votes’ distribution it is still more important for a presidential candidate to emphasize on the states with the majority of electoral votes. According to Medvic (2009), this system confers legitimacy to the presidential candidate in large measures, since it does not require only the winner of the rough majority of votes but also exaggerates the margin of victory. According to this system, the winner of a presidential election is determined by all the states. This gives him/her the power to exercise his/her authority across all states and, since our government is federal, promotes the coordination between the state and the national government, thus, improving governance. When using this system, despite the voter turnout in a state, the electoral votes in the Electoral College always remain the same. Therefore, this system helps in addressing the discrepancies of voter turnout among all the states (Drachman & Langman, 2008). This helps to shield an electoral process against factors that might influence or hinder voter turnout in particular states. It also ensures that no presidential candidate is favored or disfavored by a particular voter turnout in a certain state in comparison to other states. Another reason why we should continue with the Electoral College is the protection it offers from the deceased or inappropriate candidates (Drachman & Langman, 2008). In case a presidential aspirant dies in the course of an election then the electors in the Electoral College can be used to elect another President, mainly from the same party, instead of another election being undertaken. Moreover, if the electors identify an inappropriate presidential candidate then those electors can elect another person from the same party to run for President. Therefore, the Electoral College prevents another election from being undertaken in case a presidential candidate dies or is proved to be inappropriate for the position. The Electoral College also enables the states with small population to influence electoral process. This is because all the states are given a minimum of three electoral votes irrespective of their size. This promotes the rights of people in these states in deciding who they want to be their President. It also encourages people from these small states to participate in an electoral process, since they know that their votes will be reflected in the outcome of the elections. Despite several positive impacts that the Electoral College has brought to the United States election system, it also brought some negative impacts to the electoral process. One of the negative impacts is that in some cases it might violate the will of the people. According to Medvic (2009), the person who is preferred by the majority of the citizens might end up not getting the presidency. This is because someone might obtain majority of the popular votes and fail to have majority of the electoral votes. Therefore, in such case the Electoral College violates the will of the people by giving the victory to the presidential candidate preferred by the majority of the states’ electors but the minority of population. Moreover, this system offers no special incentive to voters to expand their political voting rights in any of the states, since each state has a fixed number of electoral votes regardless of voter turnout. The population of that particular state and its congressional representation (Polsby et al., 2011) determines these electoral votes. This might result in a low voter turnout by making some people fail to vote, thus, failing to reflect the choice of people. It also makes the majority of the citizens, especially those in heavily populated states, fail to recognize the importance of their votes in an election process. According to Medvic (2009), the Electoral College can also exaggerate a margin of victory of a presidential candidate. This is because the candidate who gets simple majority of votes in a state ends up getting all the electoral votes entitled to that state. This can actually misguide in determining the person who is actually preferred by people throughout all states and, thus, the Electoral College can end up imposing unpopular President for the people. The presence of Electoral College has also made it difficult to have a more than two parties in a presidential election. This limits individual’s rights to run for presidency and reduces the choices of the voters. Since the Electoral College resulted in having only two major political parties, the competitiveness of the election increased. This competitiveness can sometimes lead to the incidences of unfairness being reported, thus, resulting in failure of democracy. Despite several disadvantages of this system, my personal position is that it should be maintained. This is because of the various advantages which the system brings that, in my opinion, have had huge positive impact on the politics of this country. A major thing, which makes me feel that we should continue with the Electoral College, is the importance of every single state in the election process due to the current system of election, although the rate of necessity differs depending on the proportion of electoral votes allocated to a state. However, this system needs several major reforms to prevent it from hindering democracy in the election process. One of the reforms that can be quite crucial in this system is distributing the electoral votes entitled to a state depending on the proportion of popular votes obtained by each candidate instead of using a simple majority rule. These kinds of reforms could make this system always reflect the will of the people and, thus, the President they elect would be the one preferred by the majority of the population. Letter to the U. S Senator (Insert Names) (Insert Personal Address) 19 May 2012 Lindsey Graham U.S. Senator of South Carolina Columbia, SC. Dear Sir, REF: Request for your support on the Issue of the Electoral College I am writing to request your support as to the position I hold on the above mentioned issue. My position on the issue of the Electoral College system is that it should not be replaced with the direct popular vote system. This is because of the advantages that we have been able to derive from it as a state. If it was not in place, we could not be having a voice as a state in a presidential election due to our small population and the little voter turnout we experience from time to time. As a result, we are not neglected in an election process, since the presidential candidates feel that our eight electoral votes can be substantial in determining the outcome of an election. This makes us as citizens of this state feel the power of our vote and, thus, we become encouraged to participate in a presidential election. However, the way this system looks like today gives room for democracy to be hindered at times, since all the electoral votes of a state are allocated to the political party that gains a simple majority in that state, sometimes fails to reflect the will of the people, especially in this state. This is because there was not even a single time in the history of the politics of this state when a political party was able to get outright majority of votes casted for their presidential candidate. As a result, I propose that this system should be reformed to incorporate the proportion of votes casted to a particular candidate in a state in the allocation of electoral votes in that state. This position represents the will of the majority of the South Carolinians and, thus, if you support it you would make a huge contribution to the support of the voice of the vast number of your citizens who share this position. I am relying on your support on any voting process that might take place regarding this issue. Kind Regards (Insert Names) References Drachman, E. R., & Langran, R. (2008). You decide: Controversial cases in American politics. Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Hewson, M. S. (2002). The electoral college. New York, NY: Infobase Publishing. Medvic, S. K. (2009). Campaigns and elections: Players and processes. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Polsby, N. et al. (2011). Presidential elections: Strategies and structures of American politics. Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Read More