The Electoral College: How Effective Is It? Essay, Research Paper
The Electoral College: How Effective Is It?
Our establishing male parents wanted to invent a program to elect the executive subdivision of the authorities without it being affected by partizan political relations. In the beginning, they instituted and stated in Article 2, Section 1, of the Constitution, the method of choosing voters is delegated to the separate province legislative assemblies, and the vote process to be followed by the voters is carefully defined ( Encarta, History ) . Originally in the Constitution, the voters were to vote for the two most qualified individuals without specification of presidential or vice-presidential campaigners. The campaigner with the most ballots would be the president and the campaigner with the least ballots would be the vice-president. After the election of 1800 there was a tie with the ballots and the determination went to the House of Representatives. After a long battle, they chose the president and vice-president, but non without adding the 12th Amendment. In 1804, Congress enacted and the States ratified the 12th Amendment, which allows for separate electoral ballots for the president and vice-president. The 23rd Amendment was besides adopted in 1961 leting the District of Columbia 3 electoral ballots, go forthing the original electoral college process stated in the Constitution well the 1 in usage today ( Encarta, History ) .
The Electoral College consists of 538 voters, one for each of the 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 Senators, and 3 for the District of Columbia. Each province & # 8217 ; s allocation of voters is equal to the figure of House members and Senators ( 2 ) each province has ( NARA, par. 1 ) . To win the election, 270 of the 538 ballots, the bulk, are needed. As stated in the Constitution, the voters can non be a member of the Senate, House of Representative or a individual keeping an office of trust or net income under the United States ( NARA, par. 6 ) . The voters are appointed by statewide popular election, and the voters have a sworn ballot to a certain campaigner. It is possible to win the popular ballot and non the electoral ballot due to the winner-take-all system. The popular ballot, the peoples vote, for each province, except Nebraska and Maine, is totaled up and the plurality victor gets the electoral ballots for that province. Since the allotment of electoral ballots is left up to the provinces, Nebraska and Maine exercising this freedom by leting the figure of electoral ballots to be relative to the popular ballot. Nebraska and Maine & # 8217 ; s electoral process makes a batch more sense to me, instead than the all or nil system most provinces use today.
In seeing the manner the Electoral College works, I have a tough clip back uping it. When the ballot of the people is non straight the cause of a President & # 8217 ; s election to office, I am confused with the democracy we live in. It is seen in the most recent election how an election is non based on what the bulk of the people want, but yet on what the bulk of the provinces & # 8217 ; voters want. The electors & # 8217 ; ballot may be based on the popular ballot, but evidently seeing the big border in the 2000 election between the electoral ballot and the popular ballot, they are non so closely related. I believe the Electoral College should be abolished due to the fact that in democracy, where authorities is constructed under the consent of the governed, people, non voters of political parties should be the 1s electing the President and Vice-President. There are many grounds why I believe the Electoral College is non an effectual manner for the American people to take their president and vice-president and besides some possible solutions to this job.
First, as I stated supra, the direct correlativity to each pe
rson’s ballot and the ballot that elects the presidential campaigners is in fact really little. Each person’s ballot goes toward a statewide sum, which so appoints its voters based on the plurality, ignoring Maine and Nebraska. Voters of which have pledged their ballot to a peculiar campaigner. So in fact, we fundamentally vote to elect others, who are chosen by political parties, to vote for us. I believe that if the bulk of the people want a certain campaigner, so that campaigner should be the elected functionary. The electoral process seems to me really bureaucratic, with the power of the people’s ballot turning really weak in the concluding result.
There are proposed solutions to this job, such as implementing a Division of Electoral Votes, where each province divides it electoral ballots to stand for the relative popular ballot for each territory ( Div. of Voters, par.1 ) . This allows more equal representation of both the popular ballot and 3rd party campaigners. Many worry how this will impact the bipartisan system, but I believe in equal chance determination, leting the people to elect their ain president, non merely a & # 8220 ; party & # 8221 ; . Another possible solution to this job is Instant Runoff Voting, where electors rank the campaigners from # 1 as precedence choice and so on. If no campaigner receives the bulk of the # 1 ballots, the campaigner with the least # 1 ballots is eliminated and the 2nd pick ballots are so transferred to the other campaigners, recounted and other campaigners are eliminated in the same manner until one victor emerges ( IRV, par. 2 ) . This reform does non appeal to me, but it does claim good factors such as guaranting a bulk ballot for the victor and besides leting more candidates-without botching the election. These proposals for reconstituting the electoral process are headed in the right way, but I believe in something much bigger and stronger.
The fact that the people & # 8217 ; s ballot is non considered the most of import facet of the election disturbs me. I think the whole Electoral College should be scrapped, with the election of our presidential campaigners resting on the will of the people. As stated in Campaign 2000, get rid ofing the Electoral College might press more campaigners to run in all provinces, instead than certain provinces, since they receive a part of their entire ballot from each province. Besides Campaign 2000 provinces that protagonists of the Electoral College want to maintain it because it forces campaigners to pay attending to little provinces as they strategize how to derive electoral ballots. In hearing this I still believe that they should be contending for the people & # 8217 ; s ballot, and non concentrating on the electoral ballot, when there is less and less correspondence between them. I think that the people that are voting believe they are projecting their ballot for their presidential choices, non the voters & # 8217 ; choices, and those, including myself, are entitled to that determination and freedom.
All in all, I believe that our current electoral system is really non-democratic and does no justness to the American people. We, the people, should be make up one’s minding who would keep the office of the executive subdivision, since he/she will be taking us into the following four old ages politically. I understand how difficult and expensive it would be to wholly trash the bing system, but with clip, forbearance and difficult work it can happen-slowly and certainly. I besides understand that unless there are other common instances like the current election, nil will likely be done to alter the electoral system we presently use today. Hopefully, we & # 8217 ; ll shortly brush such an election, which has much conflict with our electoral system, where the authorities is forced to amend the Constitution to reflect the will of the people affecting the election of our President and Vice-President.