Electoral College: To Vote or Not To Vote That Is the Question

Electoral College:

To Vote or Not To Vote that is the Question

The Electoral College is a controversial mechanism of presidential elections that was created by the framers of the U.S. Constitution as a compromise for the presidential election process. The Electoral College is basically, each state's popular vote determines which candidate gets all of the state's electoral votes. If a candidate wins by one vote or one million votes, he gets all of that state's electoral votes. The electoral vote count equals the number of Representatives plus the number of Senators. (Bonsor 2001) The Electoral College adds up the electoral votes in each state, if one candidate gets a majority (270 votes), he wins. On the Monday following the second Wednesday in December, the electors of each state meet in their respective state capitals to officially cast their votes for president and vice president. These votes are then sealed and sent to the president of the Senate, who on Jan. 6 opens and reads the votes in the presence of both houses of Congress. The winner is sworn into office at noon Jan. 20. Most of the time, electors cast their votes for the candidate who has received the most votes in that particular state, so they say.

If you are wondering how a person becomes an elector, let me tell you. The elector is nominated by his or her state party committee. The elector must campaign for a spot and the decision is made during a vote held at the state's party convention. There are some requirements for being a qualified elector. He or she can't be a Representative or a Senator, a high ranked U.S. official in a position of trust or profit, and it can't be someone that rebel against the United States. Usually electors are people that are highly involved in their political party. The electors are distributed among all of the states. Each state has a different number of electors: Alabama 9; Alaska 3; Arizona 10; Arkansas 6; California 55; Colorado 9; Connecticut 7; Delaware 3; Washington D.C. 3; Florida 27; Georgia 15; Hawaii 4; Idaho 4; Illinois 21; Indiana 11; Iowa 7; Kansas 6; Kentucky 8; Louisiana 9; Maine 4; Maryland 10; Massachusetts 12; Michigan 17; Minnesota 10; Mississippi 6; Missouri 11; Montana 3; Nebraska 5; Nevada 5; New Hampshire 4; New Jersey 15; New Mexico 5; New York 31; North Carolina 15; North Dakota 3; Ohio 20; Oklahoma 7; Oregon 7; Pennsylvania 21; Rhode Island 4; South Carolina 8; South Dakota 3; Tennessee 11; Texas 34; Utah 5; Vermont 3; Virginia 13; Washington 11; West Virginia 5; Wisconsin 10; Wyoming 3, for a total of 538 electoral votes. Like I said before majority need to win is 270 electoral votes. Each of the state's electoral votes represents that state's population.

Pros to Electoral College

There are many arguments for the Electoral College. It gives the minority groups in small states a larger say, otherwise they wouldn't be heard. This is so because the voters of even small minorities in a State may make the difference between winning all of that State's electoral votes or none of that State's electoral votes. And since ethnic minority groups in the United States happen to concentrate in those States with the most electoral votes, they assume an importance to presidential candidates well out of proportion to their number. (Kimberling 2003) Another one is that the college filters the vote so in case of regional rivalry there's a reasonable solution. Without such a mechanism, they point out, president would be selected either through the domination of one populous region over the others or through the domination of large metropolitan areas over the rural ones. This mechanism does not, however, come without a small price. That price is that in very close popular elections, it is possible that the candidate who wins a slight majority of popular votes may not be the one elected president. They further argue that it provides a framework for organizing a campaign. Without it, candidates wouldn't have a focus like they do now. It gives the presidential candidates a game plan to work on. They want to focus on the bigger states with the most electoral votes. So, the presidential candidates set up campaigns in those states. The last argument is that it contributes to the political stability of the nation by encouraging a two-party system. This is true because it is so difficult for a new or minor party to obtain enough popular votes to have a chance of winning the presidency. (Kimberling 2003) Thus we end up with two large political parties which reflect the center of public opinion rather than dozens of smaller parties catering to different views. Such a system forces political coalitions within the political parties rather than within the government.

Cons to Electoral College

And there are many arguments against the Electoral College. The number one reason is that a presidential candidate that has won the presidential election might lose. The distribution of Electoral votes in the College tends to over-represent people in rural States. And second of all, the winner takes all mechanism whereby the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes in the State wins all the Electoral votes of that State. One effect of this mechanism is to make it extremely difficult for third party or independent candidates ever to make much of a showing in the Electoral College. (Kimberling 2003) Another one is that it is a very complicated system. It's hard to try to explain the Electoral College to a common person. We as the people want an election system that we can understand and know a lot about. This system also disrupts the possibility of electing a minority president, the ones without the absolute majority of popular votes. (Kimberling 2003) One way in which a minority president could be elected is if the country were so deeply divided politically that three or more presidential candidates split the electoral votes among them such that no one obtained the necessary majority. And lastly, the risk of the so-called faithless elector, these are the ones that pledge to vote for his party's candidate for president but never votes for the other candidate. These faithless Electors have never changed the outcome of an election, though, simply because most often their purpose is to make a statement rather than make a difference. That is to say, when the electoral vote outcome is so obviously going to be for one candidate or the other, an occasional Elector casts a vote for some personal favorite knowing full well that it will not make a difference in the result.

Concerns and Solutions

The ones that are against the Electoral College point to Bush as a reason to get rid of the current system,

...