Rockridge High School

Taylor Ridge, Illinois

Teacher: Barbara Downey

Does Your Vote Count?
By Jennifer Nacin
12^th grade 

           

 

We are so fortunate to live in the land of the free…a land where anything is  possible and anything can be achieved…a country of great safety, stability, and tremendous power…a place where citizens have freedom of speech and where they can make their voices heard.

However, there is one place where the American people are deprived of this right.   This injustice takes place in our electoral process.  The Electoral College which is presently used as our method of selecting a President denies Americans their full voice and their true vote for President.  In the long run, a vote in the Electoral College never really “counts.”  The only way to give Americans the right to voice their opinions on who should be the President of this country is to have a direct vote.

One problem with the Electoral College is that it cuts the number of parties to two: Republican and Democratic.  Third Party candidates barely have a chance in a Presidential election.  Presently there are about twenty “third” parties, most of which have never been heard of before. How is it that only two parties reign in elections when America has always been seen as the land of diversity and election opportunities?  In 1992, Ross Perot, a Reform Party Candidate, won 12% of the popular vote.  However, because of the Electoral College he was awarded zero electoral votes because he did not win the majority of votes in any state.

If we would have used a direct election, Perot would have been acknowledged for his 12% of the popular vote.  The country would have seen these results which could have increased the popularity of that party.  From then on, that party could have grown and maybe one day had a candidate who would win the election.

A major reason that the Electoral College is an unfair electoral process is because it takes away the full voice of citizens and their direct say in Presidential elections.  Why is it that people can vote directly for Senators and Representatives but not for their President? Does this make any sense at all?  We use Senators and Representatives to tally up the number of electoral votes each state should be given.  But why can we not vote directly for President?  Direct elections could give the American citizens a chance for their votes to count.

Some voters say that the Electoral College was intended to hinder the general public from having any direct power in Presidential or Senatorial elections.  The American people should be hindered in no way whatsoever.  As a democracy, it is our right as Americans to have a say in major actions that involve us or the well being of the country.

As mentioned earlier, with the Electoral College there are really only two main parties. The amount of money spent on campaigns is another reason why this system seems to be so selective.  During the 2000 Presidential Election, Governor Bush proposed a comprehensive finance reform for all campaigns.  Bush wanted to guarantee that every individual would have some say and control in the political process.  He suggested banning unions and corporations from giving extra money to political parties.  This singled out certain parties and did not give other parties as great of an opportunity.  Fully disclosing money to political parties could give voters a powerful debate which could also entitle voters to complete candidate information. 

Bush also opposes using taxpayers’ money for campaigns.  Why should Americans be forced to fund candidates they do not support?  That taxpayer money could be used for so much more.  With George W. Bush’s plan for financial campaign reform, more individuals could be able to have their voices heard during elections, and Americans could have more candidates.  This reform should become a law because the candidate with the most money to run for President would not necessarily be the best man for the job.  Money does not make good honest men.  The best man for President would shine through if everyone had a chance and was not hindered by a lack of money.  The country would have more parties and diverse people to vote for in this case. More and more parties would be known by the public and would then have a better chance at running in the election. 

The Electoral College has not in many cases been proven to be a wrong way of voting for President.  But what if there were a better way?  Direct election would give the American people their right to use their freedom of speech in the election for their President.  In the land of the free, direct elections would be most beneficial to us as American citizens.  A vote in a direct election is a vote that counts.

Sources:

 “Campaign Finance Reform.” Online. Internet. 20 Dec. 2000. Available www.georgewbush.com/issues/campaignfin.html

“Citizens for True Democracy: Electoral College Problems.” Online. Internet. 3 Jan. 2001 www.claremontmckenna.com/ctd/college.html.

“Citizens for True Democracy: The Electoral College.” Online. Internet. 3 Jan 2001. www.claremontmckenna.com/ctd/const.html.

 

Questions:

1.     How and when did the United States elect a president and vice president of different parties? Name them and their respective parties?

- The President and Vice President were elected by the Electoral College in the year 1796.  Federalist John Adams became President and Republican Thomas Jefferson became Vice-President. 

 

2.     Describe the four ways that were suggested to elect the President between 1808 and 1846.

- Choosing a President by lot was proposed in 1808.  Candidates were to come from retiring Senators.  In 1816 direct elections were suggested.  In 1822 it was proposed that the President be chosen by four religions on a rotating basis.  The automatic plan was introduced in 1826. In the automatic plan a state's electoral votes would automatically be cast for the candidate who received the highest popular vote. 

 

3.     Name five U. S. Presidents who were elected with less than popular vote.

- John Quincy Adams, James Polk, Abraham Lincoln, James Buchanan, and Zachary Taylor were elected with less than the popular vote.

 

4.   Describe the winner-take-all system . Which states use this system?
-The winner-take-all system takes the majority of the popular vote in a state and whatever candidate has the majority wins the number of electoral votes for that state.  All states but Maine use this system.

 

5.     When do the electors vote and when are the results shown?

- Article II Section 1:3 of the Constitution states, “The Congress may determine the time of choosing elections, and the day on which they shall give their votes: that day shall be the same throughout the United States.”  Congress chose the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to vote.  The results are declared in January. 

 

6.     What effect would substituting a direct popular vote for the Electoral College have on the third party candidates and why?

- In a direct popular vote, the third party candidates would have a better chance at winning because they would be able to keep the percentage of votes they receive. In a present day election, a third party candidate most likely would never win the majority of a state and therefore gain no electoral votes.

 

7.     Give four arguments for and against a direct vote system.

- For direct vote: The Electoral College only has two main parties; Republicans and Democrats.  Third party candidates hardly have a chance to win any electoral votes at all.  The American people would have more people to choose from in a direct election and would vote for other parties.  A direct vote system would give Americans a direct voice in who they believe should be president.
- Against direct vote: The Electoral College gives stability to the United States government and is favored by many Americans. It also balances power between urban and rural areas.  Some say that a direct voting system could divide the country.

 

8.   Describe the differences between the district plan, the proportional plan and the winner-take-all plan.                                                                    
- The district plan pleases conservatives and minority party candidates because it reassures them that they would have a chance at winning a few electoral votes in an election.  It also elevates local leaders at the expense of national party officials.  The proportional plan is a division of each state's Electoral College votes depending on the popular vote secured by each party.  The winner-take-all plan is a system where any candidate that is given the most Electoral College votes would win the election.

 

9.     State the four points experts in 1969 agreed should be included in an ideal plan for electing U.S. Presidents.

-  Four points the experts listed are as follows: the need for a quick decision and clear-cut winner, the victor should be the peoples' choice winner of the most popular votes, the president-elect should have a mandate to govern, a legitimacy which comes from a good margin of victory, and the ideal system should not undermine the two-party system.

           

10.    “Crisis is opportunity” = Crisis is a time in life that can either makes things worse for others or bring about a hero to set things right again.  When chaos arises, it gives someone a chance to make amends and put things back on the right track.  This “hero” then receives a reputation for the good deeds he/she has done, and this might give them other opportunities for other various activities.

 

Back