Electoral College Dbq Analysis

Walter E. Williams discuss how Hillary Clinton blamed the electoral college for her losing the presidential election. Williams stated that many individuals believed that the electoral college is dangerous when it comes to American politics. Individuals also claims that there are three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people in the state of Wyoming which was another factor that weight in the presidential election. In California, one electoral vote equals 715,000 people. Williams also stated that there a lot of individual who complain about using the electoral college since they believe that it’s undemocratic.

America's founding fathers were obviously incredibly intelligent. In addition to composing the masterful works of writing that sculpted The United States, they also planned and arranged a system to elect the president unlike any other on Earth. Wary of human nature, the Fathers avoided implementing a simple majority election, and instead developed the electoral college. This system of voting for the president has seen its share of disputes and critics, yet it remains relatively unchanged since its first uses. Those that oppose the electoral college do so because it represents the states unfairly, it has a negative effect on voter turnout, and it occasionally fails to elect a president that represents the majority.

The electoral college is a process the founding fathers established in the constitution with the intent to create a safeguard between the population and the selection of a president, and to give extra power to smaller states. However, based on the information presented in the articles the electoral college should be abolished as it violates our right of political equality, and fails to represent a third, independent, party in any election. Although there are many reasons to abolish the electoral college, the principal reason to take action would be the result of an obvious violation of our right to be politically equal. As shown in the chart provided (Doc D) 12 of the lowest populated states and the District of Columbia have almost the

For example, Wyoming is the least populated state, and its electors represent the population in a ratio of one elector per roughly 189,000 voters. California, the most populated state, is represented in a ratio of one elector per around 677,000 voters. This means that the votes cast by states with smaller populations, such as Wyoming, hold more weight than the votes from larger states. The Electoral College also typically causes candidates to focus on “swing states” more heavily than other states. Candidates campaign primarily in states such as Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, because these states are not always preferential toward one political party.

On document C, the text says, “It is designed to promote good government and legislation that forwards the common good of a large and diverse nation” (Document C), “It has formed our political parties, moderated our more extreme elements and forged the presidential campaigns that have given direction to our ship of state” (Document C). This here explains that the Electoral College is designed to promote good government and legislation to progress from our distinct nation. This comes to the closure of that the Founding Fathers created this for the common good of our nation and it promotes many elements that shape America as we see it

First of all, with the Electoral College system in play, small states are highly over-represented. “No matter how big or how small, each and every state in the US is allocated at a minimum, three electoral votes; two senators and one representative or more depending on the population of that particular state.” (Document A) In order to make this possible, bigger states must give away some of their electoral votes to the smaller states, making smaller states highly represented and bigger states not so highly represented. For further example, here is an excerpt taken from “The Indefensible Electoral College” written by Bradford Plumer, “Because each state casts only one

It has thus organised a political system which allows States to be quite independent, having many rights and powers, including the making of their own Constitution... The Federal system impacts the way American citizens vote ; the Electoral College results in it. However, according to some people, the Electoral College is an obstacle to freedom of choice and liberty of expression for the electors. Then, in what extend the Electoral College could act as a brake on democracy? On the one hand, the pros Electoral College, as William Kimberling (Deputy Director FEC office of Election Administration), point to that « important political powers are reserved to States » since they are represented « according the size of their population ».

Being a person of politics yourself, you of all people should know that many compromises have been made over the course of the establishment of the United States. However, some of the compromises, like the electoral college, were made because of factors in the past and are now not needed in today’s modern democracy. While the electoral college once worked as a compromise in the past, it is an archaic system that unfairly represents the votes of citizens all across the nation. A popular vote should instead be utilized to fairly choose the people of power in this country and would better represent voters’ opinions. In implementing the electoral college, most states’ votes either go to one candidate or the other, leading to candidates to only campaign in swing states (Bradford Plumer 13).

Contrary to popular belief, when it comes to voting for president, the United States runs on an indirect democracy. This means that we do not directly choose our president; the electoral college is rather an example of federalism, both the Feds and the States are involved in the process. It is a collection of 538 votes that determine who the President will be: 100 senators, 2 per state, and 438 representatives, distributed by the population. These 538 votes in the Electoral College are divided among the states. Each state, no matter how populous or not, starts off with three votes.

For many years, America’s voting system has been criticized, with the main point of interest being the Electoral College. Some say that the Electoral College is necessary to streamline and simplify the voting process, while others say that it is outdated and takes away power from American citizens. After investigating the subject, it is clear that the Electoral College should be abolished due to the three major defects its critics find in the system; its undemocratic nature, its tendency to give small states’ votes too much power, and its disastrous effects on third-party candidates. The first, and possibly largest, defect in the Electoral College is its undemocratic nature. A professor of political science once said that “the Electoral College violates political equality” (Edwards 453).

Benjamin Bolinger, the author of, “Point: Abolishing the Electoral College,” believes that America was founded on the idea of majority rule. He asserts that the Electoral College defies these ideals through the winner-take-all system, which has allowed candidates to lose the popular vote but still earn a ticket to the white house. The author believes that the President should be chosen the same way as every other elected official, by a popular vote. In a popular vote, the majority would rule and every person’s voice would matter (179). In addition, the author points out that America was also founded on the phrase, “no taxation without representation,” and yet four million United States citizens are excluded entirely from voting in the election.

(Black, 2012) So, while it is clear that the Electoral College was set up to ensure all states have a voice, it now seems to have the ability to take away the voice of the people. It is necessary to look at our voting process and make the necessary changes needed to ensure the process of electing our President represents the voice of the people. By switching to a majority vote we ensure that the voice of all people are not only heard, but are represented equally, which is how it should be under the one-person, one-vote

The Electoral College system the founding fathers devised helps to balance out the power of the large, populous states. This system forces candidates to campaign in all states since they all carry some sway in the elections (“Understanding the Presidential Election”). However, other issues present themselves as well, like states with large independent voters that can be swayed and the issue that a candidate can lose the popular vote and win the election. The first issue is that states that are equally divided between democrats and republicans and hold a large number of electoral votes like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania are considered swing states. (“Understanding the Presidential Election”)

Several years after the United States came to be, the Constitutional Convention met to determine how the new nation should govern itself. The delegates saw that it was crucial to have a president and vice president, but the delegates did not want these offices to reflect how the colonies were treated under the British rule. The delegates believed that the president’s power should be limited, and that he should be chosen through the system known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a body of people who represent the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the electing of the president and vice president. Many citizens feel that the Electoral College goes against our nation’s principle of representative democracy, while others

The Electoral College system, in our government today, is made up of a winner-take-all system. The winner take all system demonstrates that whichever candidate that receives the most votes wins all of the electoral points and the other candidate receives nothing. The Electoral College system enacts the candidates of both parties to only visit the larger states, in which they know they will most likely receive the most electoral points. This is not technically fair because each state is not getting proper representation. When states disagree, with one candidate’s views on a particular issue, they can swing and vote for the other candidate causing the other candidate to alter their approach to win back the state.