Newell-Fonda
High School
Newell,
Iowa
Teacher:
Connie Doonan
Instant
Runoff Voting
By Ryan Devereaux
12th grade
With all of
the controversy surrounding the 2000 election, the United States should look into how the
country is running their elections. The
American public doesn’t have time to wait over a month to find out who their next
president will be. When the news media’s
speculate that Gore has won Florida, then they expect to see Gore in the Florida column
the next morning. That didn’t happen
this year. The election process needs to be
quick and accurate. The Electoral College
obviously took too long this year, and there are many alternatives to it, such as instant
runoff voting.
A direct vote
system would be a much easier way for the American people to get their vote, opposed to
the Electoral College. Every person’s
vote should count. When the votes are added
up in all of the states, then whoever has the most total votes should win the election. The Electoral College doesn’t work that way. The Electoral College has 538 total electoral
votes in the United States. A president must
have 270 to win. Because Iowa has a smaller
population, we only get seven electoral votes. California
and other big states have thirty or more. If
Bush had won California by less then one hundred votes, then none of those votes for Gore
would count because Bush would get the thirty electoral votes and all of those votes for
Gore mean nothing to the American people. With
a direct vote, all of the American people’s votes would count the same. Too many people’s votes don’t matter in
some states because of the Electoral College. The
Electoral College is not needed in today’s government system. In a direct vote it wouldn’t matter what
state a person is in, it just matters what person they wanted their vote to go to. The votes would just be counted once and the
results let known to the people right away, not a month later. It wouldn’t matter who gets Florida’s
electoral votes, it would be whoever has the most total votes. The United States should really get rid of the
Electoral College and go to a direct vote.
Instant
runoff voting is an interesting system that has been proposed. It isn’t possible for a person to win with
thirty percent or less of the popular vote, like some systems are. A runoff election will ensure a candidate gets at
least fifty percent of the popular vote by allowing voters to rank the candidates by
preference. It would solve the wasted vote
problem for those who support the third party. It
works by having voters rank their preference going: 1,2,3 and so on. All of the first choice votes are counted first. If no one gets fifty percent of the votes then the
candidate in last place is eliminated. If a
person voted for the eliminated candidate then their second choice would be counted. If a candidate has fifty percent after that, then
they win the election. If not then the
candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated, and so on.
Instant
runoff voting is not very complex, but it is a change.
Candidates who may have the same ideas as other’s may have a better chance of
winning. The present winner-take-all system
allows people with lower overall support to win the election. There are also no wasted votes with instant runoff
voting. It gives every candidate in the race
a chance to win because of the first, second, and third choices. In addition to helping with state and national
races, it can save a lot of money because it prevents the need for runoff elections. It
can also help the average candidate run because it makes it more affordable for them to
run because of there only being one election to finance.
This could be a voting system of the future because no matter what, it prevents a
minority of voters from defeating a candidate supported by a minority.
An election
to the American people is a big thing. Many
people can’t wait until the election, and can’t wait to see who their president
is the next morning after the election. The
Electoral College is not a clear system of voting for the people today. If we had an instant runoff voting system, then it
might not change who wins the election, but it would be a way to help out the election. It is a clear way to vote and helps find out who
the people really feel should be president. Some
people just vote for the person that feel will finish last because they don’t like
the other candidates. Instant runoff voting
would eliminate that. Get rid of the
Electoral College, and bring in the instant runoff voting system.
Required Reading Questions
1.In
1796, John Adams, a Federalist, was elected as president
and Thomas Jefferson, a Republican was elected as vice president because there was no
Electoral College. There was no rule that said there couldn’t be a president of one
party and a vice president of a different party, so that is how it happened.
2.In
1808, the proposal to chose the President by lot first surfaced. In 1816, a direct-vote plan was proposed by
Senator Abner Lacock and was defeated 21-12. In
1822, it was proposed that the president could be chosen by four regions on a rotating
basis. In 1826, Charles Haynes introduced the
automatic plan whereby all of a state’s electoral votes would automatically be cast
for the candidate who received the highest popular vote.
It kept the winner-takes-all of the present system.
3.Five
presidents that were elected with less than a popular vote were: Richard Nixon, John
Kennedy, Harry Truman, Abraham Lincoln, and John Quincy Adams.
4.The
winner-take-all system says whoever gets the highest percentage of votes, gets everything
and the rest of the votes are disenfranchised. It
is used in every state except Maine.
5.Electors
vote on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. In January they are
counted before both houses and the results are known.
6.Having
a direct popular vote for the Electoral College would have a good affect on third party
candidates because they would have a better chance of winning and it helps them out.
7.Four
arguments for the direct vote system are: it would give equal weight to one vote, it would
do away with the faithless elector problem, reduce the chance of fraud, and encourage
greater participation and place the election more fully into the hands of the people where
it belongs. Four arguments against the direct
vote system are: an unfavorable impact on two-party systems, it would encourage minority
parties because there would be a greater probability that two major parties would not
receive a majority, it would make actual voting more important than population, and would
give less voice to the poor non-voters.
8.The
proportional plan is the percentage of the states, 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 the winner-takes-all system gives
all the votes to whomever has the highest percentage.
9.The
four points experts in 1969 agreed should be included in an ideal plan for electing U.S.
Presidents were: the need for a quick decision and clear-cut winner, the victor should be
the people’s 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.
10.The
Shrinkage Phenomenon is a mysterious effect that diminishes prospects’ stature as
soon as they enter the race. It usually
happens because of jealousy, and others can’t take it that they didn’t get it.