Newell-Fonda
High School
Newell,
Iowa
Teacher:
Connie Doonan
Campaign
Reform in the United States
By Becka Kosky
12th grade
Are
the American people ready for a change in the election process? Many people strongly
believe that after this year it is time for a change in the way we elect our president.
This year’s election should not have ended in the way it did. The way that it was
handled was wrong. The election itself is
supposed to be an honor received but neither candidate was able to relax and enjoy it
because of the mess in the election. In order
for the election, the people vote in candidates and the candidates are able to continue if
they are able to fork out enough money. Money plays an important role in everyone’s
lives. The candidates were not only affected
by this confusion and nonsense, but the entire nation was stunned about the poor decisions
that were being made during this election. The president of the United States holds the
most powerful position of anyone in this democratic nation. The electoral college and
direct plan serve different rolls; however, the electoral college gets the people more
involved on what is going on in the presidential election.
When asked to favor either the direct plan or the
Electoral College, it shouldn’t be a problem deciding which one is the correct plan
in electing the president. The direct plan and the electoral college are different, but
yet they are very easy to acknowledge. First of all, lets talk about the direct plan. This
plan is unique because this only has to do with the popular votes. Meaning, people vote
into the direct vote, and then the votes are tallied. Then whoever has the most votes then
becomes the next president.
The
Electoral College, on the other hand, was an easy decision to make on getting the job
done. The Electoral College has a different meaning than the direct plan. The people vote,
and then the total number of popular votes in each state is counted. Whoever wins the
popular vote in that state, wins the electoral vote. This is a more fair plan because it
gets more of the people involved in the process of choosing the candidates. If we had a direct vote, the candidates would just
campaign in the bigger cities and forget about the smaller states. Since we have the
electoral college, they have to concentrate on everyone, including us small town people.
This system allows candidates who came in second place in the popular vote to still have a
shot at winning the presidency. The Electoral College prevents the third parties from
winning the presidency.
Campaign
finance reform is an issue that should become a law. This way it becomes a race between
ideas and not how much money the people can spend. Also this way everyone has the same
amount of money to spend on their campaign. A lot of money is wasted during these
campaigns and in order to keep in the election; enough money must be present. There is way too much money that is brought into
these campaigns. By having this amount of money, it allows the rich to have a big
advantage towards being elected. The average
incumbent US House Senator spent $4.5
million, against the average challenger’s amount of $2 million. The presidency race
is known to spend up to $75 million.
It
becomes very expensive to stay in any contested race.
The campaign finance reform law has passed through four states: Massachusetts,
Arizona, Vermont, and Maine. The candidates must first meet the ballot access requirements
and then meet the eligible money amount. Money usually wins elections, while leaders who
run on principle usually loose and fall hard. America needs campaign finance reform if it
is to ever get back the connection between the people and the elected Representatives. For
example, Soft Money. This means that big corporations give money to local and state
candidates but really it is for people who believe in their corporation.
The
differences between the Electoral College and the direct vote are obvious; therefore, it
is clear to see that the Electoral College works more smoothly with the people. It gives everyone an equal chance to become the
next president. This process is more adequate. The
candidates put a lot of time and devotion into this election and by choosing this process
it allows everyone to get involved in the process of electing a president. Campaigning
gives our president something to look forward to, for support and for more. Our Founding
Fathers have created the US Constitution to gives citizens the power to govern each other,
by entrusting our elected officials. The conditions have changed, so we must understand
the laws and how “We the people” allow our best interests to be represented.
Questions
to be answered after required reading has been completed
1.
How
and when did the United States elect a president of different parties? The first major problem occurred in the election
of 1796. This between John Adams, a
Federalist, as president, and Thomas Jefferson. In the 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron
Burr wound up tie and the House Representatives then chose presidents. In the 12th
Amendment in 1804 are mandated by electoral votes to be declared a winner. The candidates
were to receive an absolute majority of electoral votes to be a winner.
2.
Describe
four ways that were suggested to elect the President between 1808 and 1846. In 1816 the first direct-vote plan was proposed by
Senator Abner Lacock of Pennsylvania and was defeated 21 to 12. In 1822 it was proposed
that four regions on a rotating basis choose the president. In 1826 Representative Charles
Haynes of Georgia first introduced the automatic plan whereby all of a state’s
electoral votes would automatically be cast for the popular votes. 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 a popular vote.
3.
Name
five U.S. Presidents who were elected with less than a popular vote. John Quincy Adams, J.
Polk, A. Lincoln, R. Hayes, J. Garfield.
4.
Describe
the winner-take-all system. Which states use this system? The winner-take-all system is
sought out to give too much leverage to a few popular votes in low turnout states, small
states and large pivotal states, which in turn gives ethnic minorities, and others who
tend to congregate in urban areas. This is proven to influence candidates toward liberal
domestic policies. This winner-take –all system is used in every state but Maine.
5.
When
do electors vote and when are the results known. The day that they are set to vote is the
first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. Then they are counted in January and
the results are officially announced.
6.
What
affect would substituting a direct popular vote for the Electoral College have on third
party candidates? Why? By substituting this
is would extend the one person one vote principle, and enhance the two-party system. He
believes that this would encourage greater participation and place the election more fully
into the hands of the people where it belongs. They also receive higher percentages that
way.
7.
Give
four arguments for and against a direct vote system. Senator Birch Bayh pointed out under
the present system it is possible for a candidate to capture eleven of the largest states,
leaving 39 states without a voice in the process. Senator Thomas Eagleton suggested it
should not be enough to carry the popular vote; the candidate must also carry a majority
of states. President Harrison in 1888 would have passed both tests as he carried twenty
out of thirty-eight states. On the other hand, the others say the Electoral College
endangers the two-party system and encourages third party strategy to win concessions from
major candidates. Sayre and Parrish feared the district plan would reverse the system
which has always ensured that the winner in our presidential contests has received a
greater margin in electoral than in popular votes, and that it would make presidential
races closer.
8.
Describe
the differences between the district plan, the proportional plan and the winner-take-all
plan. The district plan says by state subdivision. The proportional plan says by party
vote states. They will also receive the popular vote and the percentage. The
winner-take-all plan gives a larger amount to popular votes in low turnout states, small
states and large pivotal states, which in turn gives ethnic minorities, and others who
tend to congregate in urban areas. By doing this it is known to lean more toward liberal
domestic policies and makes them more internationalist in foreign policy.
9.
State
the four points experts in 1969 agree should be included in an ideal plan for electing
U.S. Presidents. They agreed for the need of 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. 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. The Crisis Opportunity is it fosters great leaders. Many believe that by staying out of the 2000
election was best because this was on of the longest economic expansion in the history and
a recession in overdue.