Concordia High School
Concordia, Kansas
Teacher: Timothy Berger
Direct Election Is Better
By Katie Letourneau
12th grade
There may be more turmoil this election year but it is nothing new. Every election year the country has controversy about the Electoral College voting system. The system was founded by our forefathers when the country was just beginning. There are still many arguments today about the pros and cons of this system. The cons outweigh the pros. The Electoral College voting system should be changed because it is outdated, it does not represent the people, and it is not fair. America should keep its voting system up to pace with today's world.
The Electoral College voting system is one that most Americans do not understand. In this system, the nation is divided by states. Each state has a certain number of electoral votes. This number is determined by population. For example, Kansas has six electoral votes and Florida has twenty-three. The presidential candidate who receives the majority of the popular votes in the state receives all of the electoral votes for that state. The presidential candidates need 270 electoral votes to win the election.1 It is possible for a candidate to win the popular vote but not win the electoral votes and therefore, not be elected president.2 The Direct Vote system would be a more efficient way of electing the president.
The Electoral College voting system is not the best system because it is outdated. The system was devised in the 18th century.3 It was devised to make the people voting more informed. The electors who were picked by the party that won the state's popular vote had the job of getting informed. These electors traveled to Washington D.C. and listened to presidential debates.2 They also gathered information about each candidate. After becoming informed the electors voted for the president.4 In today's society the electors are unnecessary. Today's world is an information based one. Each voter has the opportunity to gain information about the candidates. Since regular voters are informed there is no need for electors to make a decision regular voters can make.
Because Electoral College is outdated it no longer represents the people. No longer does one vote seem to make much of a difference. People do not feel like their vote counts. Since people do not feel represented they do not vote. Feelings toward the Electoral College voting system could be a part of the decline in the percent of registered voters that actually vote. For instance, a Republican's vote in a Democratic state does not count. Since the majority of the people in the state are Democrat the Democratic candidate gets all the electoral votes. It does not matter if the Republican voter voted or not. In this case the Republican voter's rights are being taken away. The Constitution promises citizens the right to vote and choose the leaders. That right is taken away when a person's vote no longer matters.
The Electoral College voting system also alters the campaign. Candidates no longer campaign to represent the people. Instead they campaign to the population. If the system were changed to the Direct Vote system candidates' campaigns would be more issue based. For example, since Bush is against gun control he would campaign to hunters. Living in a rural area makes voters here against the proposed gun control laws. Direct Vote would make candidates campaign to the people instead of to the numbers in the states. This would represent the people in a more efficient way. Direct Vote would also cut down on campaign spending. This would help eliminate the problem of “soft money”. Candidates should only be allowed to campaign with money already provided by the government. There should be laws to regulate spending. Each candidate should receive a set amount of funds from his/her party. The types of fundraisers should be determined by the government. Once a certain amount of money is raised the candidate must stop fundraising. If their campaigns go over the limit the campaigns should be discontinued. Campaigns need to be about the people, not about who has the most money or where they got it. The candidates need to focus on the issues and representing the people.
Another problem with the Electoral College voting system is the problem it poses for third parties. Electors represent only two parties, Republican and Democrat. Voters figure that there is no way a third party candidate will receive enough of the popular vote to receive the electoral vote. Therefore, voters do not vote third party. In the big picture, a third party vote doesn't count for anything. The only times a third party candidate has received electoral votes has been in 1960 and in 1968. A third party candidate could get a percent of the popular vote and receive zero electoral votes. The Electoral College voting system excludes third party candidates and voters.
A question the Electoral College voting system poses is "what makes electors so special?" Once they are voted in, electors are not guaranteed to vote for the party they represent.5 There are 26 states that allow their electors to change the way they are expected to vote.3 By being able to vote any way they want, electors do not represent their state. They are just regular people like the rest of the population. It is not fair that their votes should count more than anyone else's vote.
There are many problems with the Electoral College voting system. It is outdated, it does not represent the people, and it is not fair. The Direct Vote system would be a better way to elect the country's leaders. The system our nation's forefathers chose does not work in today's society. Winston Churchill stated, "the Electoral College system is probably the worst possible method of choosing a president - except for all the others."3 In today's world the Direct Vote system would be a better choice for choosing the leaders of the future.
Works Cited
“How the Electoral College Works”. Ask Jeeves Inc. 1996-2000. <http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm>
“electoral college”. Encyclopedia Britannica. 1999-2000. <http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/510,5716,32825+1+32264,00.html?qvery=electoral;>
Wikman, Eric. The Electoral College: Then, Now, and Tomorrow. 1999 <http://www.wikman.com/eric/electoralcollege.html>
Adrian, Charles. The American Political Process. New York: Mcgraw-Hill, 1965. 72-75
Woll, Peter. American Government. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969. 321-323
1.
How and when did the United States elect
a president and a vice president of different parties?
Name them and their respective parties.
In the election of 1796 John Adams, a Federalist, was voted as president. Thomas Jefferson, a Republican, was voted as vice president. This happened because a Federalist elector voted for Thomas Jefferson.
2.
Describe four ways that were suggested
to elect the President between 1808 and
1846.
In 1808 it was proposed to choose the President by lot. This meant that retiring Senators would pick the candidates. Later it was suggested that states elect candidates. In 1822 it was proposed that the President be chosen by four regions on a rotating basis. In 1826 the automatic plan was proposed. With this plan all of a state’s electoral votes would automatically be cast for the highest popular vote candidate. In 1824 the proportional plan was proposed. With this plan a state’s Electoral College votes would be divided according to popular vote.
3.
Name five U.S. Presidents who were
elected with less than a popular vote.
Five U.S. Presidents that were elected with less than popular vote were John Quincy Adams, J. Polk, Z. Taylor, J. Buchanan, and A. Lincoln.
4.
Describe the winner-take-all system. Which states use this system?
With the winner-take-all system the candidate that gets popular vote receives all of the electoral votes. All states but Maine use this system.
5.
When do electors vote and when are the
results known?
The electors vote the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. The results are known by January sixth.
6.
What affect would substituting a direct
popular vote for the Electoral college have on third party candidates? Why?
Direct-voting would encourage minority parties because it would be more likely that two major parties would not receive a majority.
7.
Give four arguments for and against a
direct vote system.
Arguments for the direct vote system are that this system would ensure that the candidate with the greatest popular vote would win. Also, it would give equal weight to each vote, it would do away with the faithless elector problem. It would reduce the chance of fraud, and place the election back into the hands of the people. Arguments against the direct vote system are that it would have a negative effect on the two-party system and that it would make actual voting more important than population. Also, it would give less voice to the poor non-voters and a candidate could win by special interest groups alone.
8. Describe
the differences between the district plan, the proportional plan, and the
winner-take-all plan.
The district plan says the popular vote should be taken and Electoral votes should be collected by state subdivisions. The proportional plan states that Electoral votes for the whole state should be divided proportionately with the popular vote. The winner-take-all plan says that the candidate in the state with the popular vote receives all the Electoral votes.
9. State
the four points experts in 1969 agreed should be included in an ideal plan
for electing U.S. Presidents.
The four points for electing U.S. Presidents are the need for a quick decision and clear-cut winner, the victor should be the people’s choice winner of the most popular vote, the president-elect should have a mandate to govern, and the ideal system should not undermine the two-party system.
10. Write a paragraph describing what is meant by the
following: The people most likely to be underrepresented
The people most likely to be underrepresented are people who lack opinions. Moderates are far behind liberals and minorities when it comes to representation. Candidates appeal to minorities and poor. Moderates’ ideas don’t get representation because they aren’t exciting enough to deserve attention from candidates.