Concordia High School
Concordia, Kansas
Teacher: Timothy Berger
The Big Question
By Tia Akers
12th grade
“Does my vote count?” As soon as one becomes of age to vote, this question is inevitable. To make a difference and “count” for something is a desire of most. With issues dealing with the opinions of the people, making sure everyone counts is of utter importance. This very topic has been debated countless times. The issue is whether or not the United States should use the Electoral College or the direct election system of voting.
The Electoral College has been the system of use for many years. Alexander Hamilton implemented it. Within the original plan, there were eight major
points.1 However the system used
today is the revised version with not all of the same points. The background for the Electoral College system is
that each state would be allocated a number or electors equal to the sum of members of
congress. These electors are selected by
nomination at a states political party meeting.2
Also state legislatures would decide the methods for choosing electors in their
respective states. Parts of the original
frame work was changed after a president and vice-president of different parties were
elected.1 Now it really is quite
simple. The election is held and the people
vote. The candidates that win cause the
Electoral College candidates to cast their vote for the president and vice-president pair. However they are not bound by the constitution to
do so. It is expected of them though. With this system, the president who wins the state
votes gets all of the electoral votes of that respective state. The critics say this system is efficient, it
identifies a winner quickly and it avoids recounts.1
Although this may sound all good and fine, it is not a flawless system. This has been completely proved by the current presidential race. One of the main problems with this system is that it would be possible for the candidate who won the popular vote to not actually win the election. This creates a feeling of doubt in the United States citizens when they are told that their vote really does count. Also the electoral vote distribution is not proportional to the popular vote distribution. This is caused by the automatic three votes per state guarantee.2 Another concern about this plan is the possibility of having a “faithless elector.” This is when a state’s Electoral College candidate does not vote for the candidate who won his/her state’s popular vote. It is also said to be unfair that the tiebreakers are either the House or Senate. Also a third party candidate could have a big influence on the representation of majority given to a president. The third party candidates can decrease it and make it harder for the major party presidential candidate to get a strong majority.1
An alternative to this solution would be to switch to a direct election system of voting. Instead of assigning states electoral votes and having electoral candidates, it would be greatly simplified. The people would directly elect the president and vice-president. Whoever wins the popular vote would be the president. With this system, every vote truly does count. This system should be implemented so the “what ifs” of the Electoral College system do not become fact.
In light of the “what ifs,” with the current presidential race, some have become fact. Even though the critics have said that it avoids recounts, it has been proved otherwise. These problems are probably not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. However, we can feel a little lucky because experts expected the process to cause more complication. They estimated that there could have been as many as nineteen out of twenty elections that would have to be decided by the House.3 In discussing the possibility of reforming the Electoral College, Akhil Amar, a Yale Law School professor said, “I consider the so-called Electoral College a brilliant 18th-century device that cleverly solved a cluster of 18th-century problems.”4 In reaction to the statement, he also said, “As we approach the 21st century, we confront a different cluster of problems, and our constitutional machinery of presidential selection does not look so brilliant.”4 In another discussion concerning the Electoral College reform, a Gore elector commented, “I think the average voter is intelligent enough to cast a popular vote.”5 In reality, a change to a Direct Election system of voting would be a better route.
Another widely debated issue in the politic realm deals with campaign reform. It has been the topic of discussion to ban the use of soft money. Soft money is any money donated to the general party fund. If soft money was banned, the money could be used for a radio add, campaign literature, or whatever the money could be used for. The majority of people on Capital Hill feel that soft money should be banned.6 The step for a change like this to happen is big and will not happen in the near future. However, the United States should make provisions to move toward the decision to ban soft money.
If there were ever to be a question that the whole United States wanted an answer to, it would be concerning the Electoral College. Any person wants to count for something. If the election were changed to a direct vote, every person would count. Today’s society is known for trying to challenge the system. By having a Direct Election, there would be no room for such an argument. Change can be a good thing if it moves in an improving and forward direction.
Works Cited
1 “Tally of the 1824 Electoral College Vote.” National Archives and Records
Administration. 17 Oct. 2000 http://www.nara.gov/education/cc/electcol.html
2 “Frequently Asked Questions on the Electoral College.” National Archives and
Records Administration. http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/eletcoll/faq.html
3 Rosenberg, Yuval. “What If They Both Win?” Newsweek 13 Nov. 2000: 34-35.
4 Sung, Ellen. Time to Reform the Electoral College? 17 Oct. 2000
http://www.policy.com/news/dbrief/dbriefarc770.asp
5 Tanner, Robert. “Should Electoral College stay or should it go?” The Salina Journal
20 Nov. 2000: A2
6 Fording, Laura. “Questions and Answers: Seeing Green.” Newsweek 6 Nov. 2000.
8 Nov. 2000 http://www.msnbc.com/news/486376.asp
Election Process Government Questions
1.
How and when did the United States elect
a president and vice president of different parties?
Name them and their respective parties.
A
president and vice president of opposite parties were elected in 1796. This happened because a Federalist elector voted
for a Republican. The presidents tied so the
House had to choose the president. The
president was John Adams, a Federalist. The
vice president was Thomas Jefferson, a Republican.
2.
Describe four ways that were suggested
to elect the President between 1808 and 1846.
The four ways suggested to elect the president from 1808 to 1846 are as follows: chosen by lot, chosen by direct vote, chosen by four regions on a rotating basis, and by all of states electoral votes cast to the candidate who received the highest popular vote.
3.
Name five U.S. Presidents who were
elected with less than a popular vote.
John Quincy Adams, James Polk, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln, and Richard Nixon were all elected presidents with less than a popular vote.
4.
Describe the winner-take-all system. Which states use this system?
The winner-take-all system is referring the electoral votes. The president that gets the most popular votes from a state automatically receives all of the state electoral votes. Every state uses this system except Maine.
5.
When do electors vote and when are the
results known?
The electors vote on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. The results are officially announced in January.
6.
What affect would substituting a direct
popular vote for the Electoral College have on third party candidates? Why?
Having a direct popular vote system would encourage third party candidates and their party systems because it would give them an easier shot at getting majority votes.
7.
Give four arguments for and against a
direct vote system.
Four arguments for the direct voting system are as follows: it would ensure that the candidate with the greatest popular vote would win the office of president, it would give equal weight to every vote, it would do away with the faithless elector problem, and would reduce the chance of fraud. Four arguments against the direct vote are as follows: it would encourage minority parties, make actual voting more important that population, give less voice to the poor non-voters represented by the weighted urban vote, and a candidate could win on the votes of special interest.
8.
Describe the differences between the
district plan, the proportional plan and the winner-take-all plan.
The district plan is where two electors are chosen on a statewide popular level and one is chosen from each of the two states’ congressional districts. The proportional plan divides each of the state’s Electoral College votes according to the popular vote received by each party. The winner-take-all system is different yet in that the president who receives the popular vote takes all of the states electoral votes.
9.
State the four points experts in 1969
agreed should be included in an ideal plan for electing U.S. Presidents.
The first point agreed on was the need for a quick decision and clear-cut winner. The second point was that the victor should be the peoples’ choice winner of the most popular votes. The third point was that the president-elect should have a mandate to govern, a legitimacy, which comes from a good margin of victory. The fourth point agreed on was the ideal system should not undermine the two-party system. All agreed that the method of electing the president holds broad implications for the political system as a whole.
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
Crisis is opportunity is an optimistic way to look at our election and government. Some people were leery in entering the 2000 presidential race because of all the things that have happened in recent times. If these people would study the history books, they would realize that this would be the prime opportunity to step in. Having a crisis to overcome creates great leaders. Abraham Lincoln and FDR both dealt with crisis and became great leaders because of it. Therefore, crisis means a great opportunity