Kadoka High
School
Kadoka, South Dakota
Teacher: Teresa Shuck
The Election
Process
By Luke Vander May
Grade 11
Many years ago our founding fathers came up with a plan for electing our president for the United States of America. After our election of our current president, President George W. Bush, there is probably a lot of discussion on the method of which we vote for president. Some people have strong feelings about leaving the voting method the way it is and some have strong feelings about changing the voting process. Some things have been created by our founding fathers and some should be left the way they created them. I feel that the Electoral College should remain in use and the United States should learn to live with it.
By using the Electoral College, each state is given a certain number of Electoral votes. The number of citizens that live in that certain state decide on the number of votes that each state receives. Along with the Electoral votes, the state is given a certain number of representatives to serve in the House and the Senate. This gives the people of the states equal representation by the representatives.
Using the current process to vote, the people go to the polls on election- day and cast their ballot of whom they would like for our next president. When they do this, the total for each candidate is made known to the nation. The winner of the popular vote is announced. After this our state representatives go and vote for president. When our representatives vote, they use the Electoral College voting process.
The Electoral votes by the representatives usually match up with the state’s popular vote. This means that the majority of the popular vote is satisfied with the Electoral votes of the state representatives. Very seldom do the Electoral votes and the popular vote not match. In only a few elections has the popular vote and the Electoral votes not matched with each other.
With the Electoral College, there are representatives from all fifty states in the United States of America. With our representatives equal representation is given to all fifty states. If there were no state representatives, the more rural areas of the United States would kind of be ignored. The large urban areas would have more votes than the rural areas and therefore have more of a say in which candidate will be our next leader of the United States.
How would our country adapt to the changing of the voting process? If the process were to be changed, there would be people that support the change and people that do not support the change. The country would probably not adapt to the change very well. After some processes have been used for a certain amount of time, change does not come easy.
The Electoral College has been used to elect the United States Presidents for many years. Americans are used to the voting process the way it is. If the Electoral College were to be changed I think there would be much controversy in the United States.
Several years ago when our founding fathers were trying to find an election process to elect our president, there were several methods tried. One of the processes that were used was the winner-take-all system. With this process the candidate with the largest percentage of the popular vote won the presidency. If candidate A had 40 percent of the vote and candidates B and C split the other 60 percent of the vote candidate A would have had the largest part of the vote. This means that candidate A would be the winner and 60 percent of the nations votes would be disenfranchised.
The winner-take-all system caused much controversy. The people who voted for candidate A would be satisfied and the other 60 percent of the population would be unhappy. This means that not even half of the nations population got the candidate that they voted for. The outcome the winner-take-all system did not agree with much of the nation’s population so the process was not used for long before another process was put into effect.
I think that the Electoral College voting process should remain in use. The Electoral College was made several years ago and put into use. After trying other methods to vote, our founding fathers decided that the Electoral College was a good way to elect a president. It gives each state equal representation and the outcome usually agrees with the popular vote of the United States population. The Electoral College is one thing that has been created and should remain in effect in the United States of America.
Answers To Questions
- How and when did the United States elect a president and vice president of different parties? Name them and their respective parties.
The last time a president and vice president of different parties were elected was 1796. This resulted in the election of John Adams, a federalists, as president, and Thomas Jefferson as vice president. At this time the top vote winner was president and the second vote winner was vice president.
- Describe four ways that were suggested to elect the president between 1808 and 1846.
In 1808 the proposal to choose the President by lot first surfaces, to reoccur unsuccessfully in 1844 and 1846.
Originally the candidates to be chosen from lot were to come from retiring senators; in later proposals the states were each to select a native-son candidate.
In 1816 the first direct-vote plan was proposed by Senator Abner Lacock of Pennsylvania and was defeated 21-12. In 1820 the second faithless elector deprived James Monroe of a unanimous vote in the Electoral College by giving John Quincy Adams, a non-candidate his electoral vote. In 1822 it was proposed that four regions on a rotating basis choose the president.
In 1824 four candidates received Electoral College votes, but none a majority. The House awarded Adams 13 states and Jackson 7, which meant that although Jackson got more popular votes and a plurality of Electoral College votes, Adams would up with the president.
In 1848 Representative William Lawrence of New York introduced the proportional plan, which called for a division of each state’s Electoral College votes according to the popular vote received by each party. Under this plan, urban areas loose power, as they would with any other plan other than the current winner-take-all system.
Despite the number of ideas advanced, the old Electoral College system continues.
- Name five Unites States presidents who were elected with less than a popular vote.
Five of the presidents who were elected with less than a majority of the popular vote include: 1824 John Quincy Adams with 37 percent, 1884 Grover Cleveland with 48.5 percent, 1948 Harry Truman with 49.5 percent, 1960 John Kennedy with 49.7 percent, and 1968 Richard Nixon had 43.4 percent.
Describe the winner-take-all system. Which states use this system?
A gets 40 percent of the vote, B get 35 percent of the vote, and C gets 25 percent of the vote. A ends up with more of the vote than the other two candidates. Candidate A ends up with everything and 60 percent of the people are disenfranchised. In the past this has given the minority party little incentive to campaign in some areas, knowing their votes won’t count for much.
The winner-take-all system in used in every state but Maine. Maine, in 1969, adopted a district plan whereby two electors are chosen on a statewide popular level and one is chosen from each of Maine’s two Congressional Districts.
- When do electors vote and when are the results known?
The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors and that day they shall give their votes. This date must be the same throughout the United States. That date has been set as the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. In January the votes are counted before both houses and the results are officially announced.
- What affect would submitting a direct popular vote for the Electoral College have on third party candidates?
If the direct popular vote was used it would have and affect. A majority of at least 40 percent should win. In case of a tie there would be a run-off between the two top pairs. This would exclude the third party.
7.) Give four arguments for and against a direct vote system.
1.) If a direct vote was used it would always ensure that the candidate with the greatest popular vote would win the office of president and give equal weight to all votes.
2.) It would replace the faithless elector problem.
3.) It would reduce the change of fraud, and
4.) It would encourage greater participation and place the election more fully into the hands of the people where it belongs.
8.) Describe the differences between the district plan, the proportional plan and the winner-take-all system.
A direct plurality system is used in the states to elect their governors who seem to have little trouble governing. This would seem to refute the argument used by those who claim that winning with a mere plurality of the votes, and especially winning after a run-off contest, would undermine or at least render more precarious the constituency base of the president.
Proponents say the proportional plan is the only electoral reform measure that would pressure the existing national-state relationship and at the same time reflect the popular vote outcome more closely.
In the winner-take-all system the candidate with the largest percent of the votes would win. This can cause controversy because if candidate A had 40 percent of the votes, B had 35 percent and C had 25 percent, candidate A would win, and 60 percent of the voters are disenfranchised.
9.) State the four points experts in 1969 agreed should be included in an ideal plan for electing U.S. presidents.
They agreed that the following points should be included in a ideal presidential election:
1.) The need for a quick decision and clear-cut winner
2.) The victor should be the people’s choice winner of the most popular votes
3.) The president-elect should have a mandate to govern, a legitimacy with comes from a good margin of victory and,
4.) The ideal system shouldn’t undermine the two-party system.
All agreed that the method of electing the president holds broad implications for the political systems as a whole.
10.) Write a paragraph describing what is meant by Crises is Opportunity.
Crisis is opportunity for some people in a way. If somebody is having a crisis, that can be an opportunity for somebody else. When
there is a crisis that is a great time to take advantage and have a great opportunity to start something new.