Newell-Fonda
High School
Newell,
Iowa
Teacher:
Connie Doonan
Reforms
to the Current System of Election
By Eric Stephen Lampe
12th grade
We
hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Many
a man has uttered these few words, and rare is it that so much is told in so few words. The words all “men are created equal”
shows that each and every persons voice counts just as much as the next persons, yet it is
shocking when the world looks at the amount of people whose vote doesn’t count due to
the out-dated electoral college system of voting. In
America’s system of government it is apparent, especially after the events of this
election that things need changed, and the main two issues should be reforms to the
Electoral College and campaign finance reform.
The
Electoral College system of voting does work, and it has proven itself over the last few
hundred years, but the question must be asked, does it work for the people or against the
people? Many of the presidents that have been
elected in the last one hundred years did not have the backing of the people. In fact some of our most beloved presidents
didn’t win the popular vote. How can we
stand behind a system that allows people with so little of a backing to hold our
nation’s highest honor? Most of our
presidents have been popular vote winners, and have captured a majority of the states, yet
they have not captured the whole state leaving the rest of the people in the captured
state to lose all of their voices, even if all but one of the districts in a state voted
against the state candidate. This happened in
the state of Iowa in during this last election. Four
out of five of the voting districts in Iowa voted for Bush but the most populous of the
districts vote almost unanimously for Gore, and so the result was that the state went for
Gore even though four out of the five districts voted for Bush.
Many
believe that this system should be reformed. One
of the most plausible reforms to this system is that instead of going with the winner
takes all system, the government could use a district plan, which would give every
district one electoral vote, and the states electoral votes could be totally eliminated. This system would have a greater chance in the
ease of use, and it would also allow more people to have their voice to be heard instead
of thinking that they have lost their right to vote.
Another
thing that needs to be reformed is campaign finances and the way that money is earned. In most elections hundreds of millions of dollars
are spent on federal election campaigns, and only a small amount comes from one-dollar
contributions. Most of a candidate’s
money comes from lobbyists in conjunction with Political Action Committees. At this very time about 5,000 of these Political
Action Committees are employing active lobbyist to persuade our elected officials. These committees are responsible for channeling
hundreds of millions of dollars into political campaigns.
Also many multi-national corporations, and some foreign governments employ
lobbyists to try and sway votes to aid their employer’s point-of-view.
The
Federal Election Commission does regulate the people who can donate, in addition to how
much in contributions everyone can give, but many people have found ways to get around
this. A contributor can give as much as they
want to a political party anytime as long as that party places these contributions in a
non-federal fund, yet the parties often use this money under such names as party building
and getting people to vote. So it is clear
why this needs to be reformed.
With
the rampant, nearly unregulated contributions to political campaigns, and a system of
electing a President that was devised in the 1800s, it is very apparent that these things
are in need of a lot of major reforms. The
current system of voting does work, yet in the current system it is very well possible to
attain this country’s highest honor without even having fifty percent of the popular
vote. The reform that is the most plausible
would be to divide the state’s electoral votes into the districts, and to get rid of
the two electoral votes that come from the senators, and have the Electoral College
divided that way. Professional lobbyists in
the employment of Political Action Committees often fund political parties, and very often
these parties are paid using soft money for their electoral campaigns. Although places exist that watch out for these
kind of donations, professional politicians can often times get around the system, and use
this money for their campaigns. With all the
corruption and people who’s voice does not get heard, it is a wonder this country can
still call itself a democracy.
Answers
To Questions For Required Reading
- The
United States elected a president and vice president of different parties in 1796 and they
were president John Adams, a federalist, and Vice President Tomas Jefferson, a Republican.
- Four
ways that were suggested to elect the president between 1808 and 1846 were; in 1808,
president by lot, in 1816, a direct system, in 1822, a rotating regional plan, and in 1828
an automatic electoral vote.
- Five
presidents who were elected in to office with less than half of the popular vote were
Adams, Polk, Hayes, Nixon, and Truman.
- The
winner takes all system is if a candidate wins the popular vote they win all of that
states electoral votes, and all states with the exception of Maine use this system.
- The
electors cast their votes on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December and
the results are known in January.
- The
affects of substituting a direct popular vote for the Electoral College on third party
candidates would be that they would have more encouragement to try because instead of
trying to have to carry a state they would at least receive some of the votes.
- Four
arguments for the direct vote are few Senate battles, quick and clear winner, people would
believe that their vote counts more then now, and representation would be based on
population. Four arguments against the direct
vote system would be less political stability, weakened state powers, votes could be based
entirely on special interest, and it would over-represent Urban votes.
- The
district plan is one in which votes are counted by district instead of by state and
electoral votes would be divided that way. The
proportional plan is one that would divide electoral votes in proportion to the amount of
popular vote.
- The
four points experts in 1969 agreed should be included in an ideal plan for electing the
U.S. Presidents were the need for a quick decision and a 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,
and the ideal system should not undermine the two-party system.
- I believe that the saying Americans pragmatists
over ideologues because people want results more then they want just great ideas down on
paper. When a person promises more then they
can deliver, the people will not like that person and their ratings will fall, plus they
will lose the chance for reelection, which seems to be the most important issues on
most politician’s minds.