Concordia High School

Concordia, Kansas

Teacher: Timothy Berger

 

debateti.gif (440 bytes)

 

Direct Voting
By Amber Campbell
12th grade

 

 

 

The citizens of the United States do not elect the president directly.  Citizens cast their votes for electors who in turn vote for the presidential candidate selected by their state.  There are many problems with the Electoral College.   Members of the Electoral College may be unfaithful to the decision of their state. The decision of the Electoral College may not agree with the popular vote.  The direct vote would give equal weight to every individual’s vote.  Most importantly the reasoning for implementing the Electoral College is no longer a factor.  The Electoral College should be replaced by a direct vote as the official way the citizens of the United States elect their president. 

         

 

States are allowed to choose electors in whichever manner they see fit[1].  Some states have laws requiring the members of the Electoral College from that state to vote for the candidate who receives the plurality of the popular vote in that state. Members from other states are allowed to vote for whichever candidate they see fit.  Members are expected to vote for their party’s choice in the presidential election.  Sometimes electors may go back on their promise to vote for the party candidate.  In the presidential election of 1820 a faithless elector gave his vote to John Quincy Adams who was not running for the presidency 2.  By voting in opposition to the decision of their state, a few faithless electors could change the outcome of the presidential election.  A direct election would take away the faithless voter issue. 

         

 

The Electoral College makes it possible for a candidate to win only a few, but very large states and win the presidency without a majority of the popular vote.   Samuel Tilden seemed to have received more of the popular and Electoral College vote, but some of his Electoral College votes were thrown out making Rutherford B. Hayes.  Benjamin Harrison won the 1888 election against Grover Cleveland by receiving more of the electoral vote even though Cleveland received more of the popular vote3. It seems as though this year’s election may be an example of this occurring in modern times.  Current tallies show Vice President Gore with a greater percentage of the popular vote although if Florida’s voters decide in favor of Governor Bush the majority of the Electoral College votes.   He will then become the president without winning the popular vote. In a direct vote system the winner of the popular vote would always become the president. 

         

 

The possibility of winning without the popular vote encourages candidates to campaign heavily and spend a great deal of money in large states with a large number of Electoral College votes.  Candidates are willing to spend soft money to finance their campaigns.  Soft money is money that by definition and law is not supposed to be part of the federal campaign finance system.  Soft money is contributed by violating the rules of how much money can [be] contributed by different sources.   For years it has been illegal for corporations or labor unions to spend money in connection with federal elections.  It is also illegal for an individual to contribute more than one thousand dollars to a federal campaign.  All of these actions are illegal, but there are numerous loopholes by which these groups can contribute to federal campaigns4.  New campaign finance reforms have been proposed in order to cut down on the amount of soft money used in the campaigns5. One reform would allow candidates to use only the money given to them by the FEC.  Each party that received at least five percent of the popular vote in the last election would have an equal amount to spend on their candidate’s campaign.

         

 

The Electoral College was put into place so that people competent of making the decision would choose the president.  Early citizens of the U. S. did not have the technology to receive information about the candidate.   The framers of the Constitution wished for the people most informed and able to analyze the capabilities of the candidates to choose the president.  “The system was developed before political parties originated.  It was also before very many people had the right to vote.”6  They did not think the average American should be entrusted with this type of responsibility.  Today voters across the nation have access to more information about the candidates than ever before possible.  Citizens would be completely capable of finding out information on the candidates themselves and making an intelligent decision about who they want to be their president.  Through a direct vote the citizens would choose for themselves the presidential candidate they feel would be best for the country.   

 

 

The Electoral College has been useful to the country, but it is now time to step forward to give citizens of the United States the ability to directly choose a president.  America is ready for a change in the way the president is chosen. The nation is no longer willing to live with idea that a president could be elected to office without receiving the majority of the vote.  Every citizen deserves a vote of equal importance in the election.   Americans no longer need someone else selecting the president for them. 

Works Cited

1.    “Grand Prize the White House.”  U.S. Politics.  U.S. News and World Report. London: The Macmillan Company, 1970.

2.     Rosenberg, Yuval.  “What If They Both Win.”  Newsweek 13 Nov 2000: 34

3.      Weingast, David E.  “The American Presidency: Electoral College.” Grolier Incorporated.  2000.  The New Book of Knowledge.  18 Oct 2000. <http://www.gi.grolier.com/presidents/nbk/side/elecollg.html

4.      “Soft Money: What is it and why is it a Problem?”  Common Cause.  2000.  Common Cause.  20 Nov 2000.  <http://www.commoncause.org/laudromat/>

5.       “Campaign-Finance Reform: Taming the System.” Policy.com.  2000. Policy.com.  9 Nov 2000.  <http://www.policy.com/issuewk/98/0914/091498g.html>

 6.     Cantrell, Timothy A.  “The Electoral College”  University of Kentucky.  1997.  University of Kentucky.  19 Oct 2000.  <http://www.uky.edu/LCC/HIS/101/electorel.html>

 

         

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

 

Originally, the Constitution provided that the candidate with the highest number of votes should be president and the runner up would be vice-president.  In 1796 this resulted in John Adams, a Federalist, becoming president, and Thomas Jefferson, a Republican, becoming vice president.

 

 

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

 

1.     A proposal was brought up in 1808, 1844, and 1846 suggesting the president should be chosen by lot. None of these proposals succeeded.  The first proposal had the president chosen from a lot of retiring senators.  The later proposals had each state choosing a native son as a candidate.

2.     A second proposal, in 1816, was to choose the president through direct vote. 

3.     In 1822, it was proposed that the president be by four regions of the U. S. on a rotating basis. 

4.     The automatic plan was proposed in 1826.  Under this plan all of the states electoral votes would go to the candidate with the highest popular vote.

 

 

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

 

1824      John Quincy Adams     37%

1860      Abraham Lincoln         39.8%

1948      Harry Truman            49.5%

1960      John F. Kennedy         49.7%

1968      Richard Nixon             43.4%

 

 

4.     Describe the winner-take-all system.  Which states use this system?

 

The winner-take-all system gives all electoral votes for a state to the candidate with the highest popular vote.  All states use this system except for Maine.  Maine uses a district plan adopted in 1969.

 

 

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

 

Electors vote on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December.  The results are officially announced in January after the votes have been counted before each house of the legislature.

 

 

6.     What affect would substituting a direct popular vote for the Electoral College have on third party candidates?  Why?

 

A direct vote would encourage minority candidates.  The likelihood of a majority party receiving a majority of the vote would be decreased.  

 

 

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

 

For:

 

  1. Such a system would insure that the candidate with the majority of the popular would receive the office of the presidency.
  2. give equal weight to each vote
  3. get rid of the faithless elector problem
  4. encourage greater participation in elections. 

 

Against:

 

  1. direct vote would weaken the power of the states and strengthen the national government
  2. state borders would be irrelevant in elections
  3. federal standards of eligibility would eventually be determined to make the presidential choices uniform
  4. federal employees would end up tallying a national vote and all election officials would be employed by the national rather than state governments

 

 

8.     Describe the differences between the district plan, the proportional plan and the winner-take-all plan.

 

a.     The district plan allows for two electors to be chosen by the statewide popular vote.  Other electors are chosen by congressional district. 

b.     Under the proportional plan a portion of the electoral votes is given to each candidate based on the percentage of the popular vote received by the party. 

c.      The winner-take-all plan gives all electoral votes to the candidate with the largest amount of the popular vote in the state.

 

 

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

 

  1. Experts agreed that there was a need for a quick decision and a clear-cut winner. 
  2. The winner should be the candidate with the majority of the popular vote. 
  3. The president-elect should have a mandate to govern, a legitimacy, which comes with a good margin of victory. 
  4. The system should not undermine the two party system. 

 

 

10.Write a paragraph describing what is meant by one of the following:

 

Shrinkage Phenomenon

Americans prefer pragmatists to ideologues

The people most likely to be under represented

Crisis is opportunity

 

 

          Americans prefer pragmatists to ideologues. 

         

To understand what is meant by this phrase one must first understand the terms pragmatist and ideologue.  Pragmatists believe the meaning of a proposition lies in its observable consequences and the sum of these consequences constitutes meaning.  Ideologues believe that, despite appearances, a proposal cannot work, unless it meets their ideals.  Americans preference of pragmatists has a direct correlation to the morals of the nation.  American are not worried nearly so much about their ideals as their bank accounts.  They feel that a leader of good moral and ethical stature would be good, but a candidate who seems more likely to accomplish their goals appears they will vote for them. Many times the people of America are willing to overlook the bad parts of a program as long as the objective is completed.  

Americans see greater value in effectiveness than in ethics.

 [Back] [Home] [Main Menu] [Another Way] [Essay Contest]  [Pilot Projects] [Archives]