Now, HE was confused! I looked around me- there was not a hint of recognition: I could see the "light bulbs" going on one by one until one of my friends said, "In other words, the State Legislature could legally decide not to allow us to choose the Presidential Electors- either directly or indirectly- by popular vote. Many are blissfully unaware- at least it rarely, if ever, pervades their everyday consciousness- that they do NOT directly vote for President or Vice-President; most have some vague notion that there is this "Electoral College" and that the candidates for those high offices get something called "Electoral Votes" which is somehow different from the "Popular Vote"- the actual, raw tally of election statistics, as in:
Because of the importance of this position, controversy has developed regarding a system of election. According to Jeraine Root, historically the Electoral College was developed through negotiation deriving from conflicts between representatives at the Constitutional Convention.
Disagreement came about regarding the strengths and weaknesses of larger or smaller states. Additionally, these representatives did not want direct election because citizens were not familiar with candidates 27 June In modern times, supporters of the current Electoral College profess that this structure is stable and highly unlikely to fail the people.
Opposing figures proclaim the Electoral College as being unsuccessful in the past and unreliable for the future. The Electoral College system exposes the chance that an unpopularly elected president may become victorious in an election and defeat the American dream of all people being counted equal in an election; therefore, this type of election defeats our system of democracy.
An electoral college is defined as a "body of representatives, chosen by popular vote, which formally elects the President and Vice-President of the United States" Macmillan Dictionary.
This definition within itself explains how our present election system could fail. Representatives who actually vote for a President are chosen by popular vote. In reality, the people are not voting for a candidate; rather, a panel of representatives is being selected.
Members of each panel are originally formulated by political parties. Once this panel forms an electoral college, the representatives may vote for whomever they please. History is evidence of the instability of this structure. Root states that, in the election of between Republican Rutherford B.
Hayes and Democrat Samuel Tilden, Hayes came out victorious. Ratios of the popular vote show Tildon with 52 percent and Hayes trailing at 48 percent. This same scenario occurred again in Because of unreliability of the Electoral College, two unpopularly elected Presidents have taken office.
Although a collapse has not occurred in the election system in over years, the possibility of a reoccurrence is not minute.
Some political scientists consider the favorable outcomes pure luck. An example of present-day cause and result is described by John McLaughlin: Unequal votes present an additional blemish of the Electoral College. This analysis is drawn for three reasons. First, states are allowed a minimum of three votes regardless of how small the state.
As stated by Root, Alaska, with a population of approximately , has three electoral votes. Texas, having a population of 14,, is allowed 29 electoral votes. The ratio between these two states isAlaskans per vote, as opposed toTexans per vote 27 June These figures are not only imbalanced, but the calculation equals discrimination.
To burden this issue even greater, there is no direct correlation between voter turn-out and electoral votes.
If no one turns out for an election, the state is still entitled to all of its electoral votes. Secondly, some states are ignored because of the "winner-take-all" system. How can something as large as a state be ignored? Unfortunately, during campaigns, candidates attempt only to impress voters who are needed to win.
Arrington uses Ronald Reagan as an example. The choice should be clear; if Reagan can obtain 40, votes in Louisiana or 20, votes in Illinois, he should campaign in Louisiana. Yet Louisiana only carries 10 electoral votes whereas Illinois is allowed 26 electoral votes.
In this instance, 20, votes are more important than 40, votes Lastly, the "winner-take-all" system creates wasted votes.rows · Electoral college: Electoral college, the system by which the president . Proponents of the Electoral College counter that a national popular vote would shift candidates' focus to urban centers, and the current .
The results of the foregoing analysis of NPVIC's to 14 march through the states indicate that, if the past is indeed prologue, NPVIC's pending search for new members should be most fruitful in Democratic-controlled states the electoral college status quo disadvantages. This narrative couldn’t be farther from the truth, as the issues surrounding the election prove exactly why the Electoral College is such an excellent system for the United States.
The Green Papers: History an historical analysis of the Electoral College.
by RICHARD E. BERG-ANDERSSON "The Green Papers" staff September 17, calling the body which actually elects the President and Vice President of the United States the "Electoral College" is a bit of a misnomer: unlike an institution such as, say, the College.
May 07, · Connecticut is the latest state to pledge its electoral votes based on the outcome of the national popular vote.
Here, an aide opens Electoral College ballot boxes during a joint session of Congress in January of , to tally ballots for the president and vice president of the United States.