Paoli High School
Paoli, Oklahoma
Teacher: Melinda Alfred
The
Election Process
By James Dulin
12th grade
On
November 7 the people of the United States of America went to their local voting precincts
and cast votes for President. After a month of controversy, recounts, [and] state and
federal Supreme Court decisions, the election fiasco ended. But the 2000 Presidential
election continues in the spotlight and has had an effect on how the entire country views
elections. New words and phrases have entered our vocabulary, such as dimpled chads and
voter intent.
We
now have a President-Elect, and after all the controversy over this election we also have
a great doubt over how we will select our Chief Executive in the years and elections to
come. The people of America must stand behind our Electoral College as the best system for
the past, present and future.
At
the Constitutional Convention in 1787 the Founding Fathers set down the rules by which
America would be run. Among a long list of compromises arrived at in creating the
Constitution was the Electoral College for choosing the Chief Executive. This was a
compromise between election by Congress and election by the people which would uphold the
balance of powers in the new Republic.
One
reason for a republican form of government, as expressed in Federalist Paper Number 10, is
to actually prevent, or at least limit a majority rule by giving the minority the ability
to stop the majority in various occasions. A good example is the three-quarters vote of
Congress necessary to overturn a presidential veto. This makes one-quarter plus one vote
more powerful than the three-quarters minus one vote. A good reason for this power of the
minority is to prevent the growth of a "Tyranny of the majority" which could
otherwise develop. The majority would then simply be a consensus that makes otherwise
tyrannical actions appear to be legitimate. Then the majority could enforce things upon
the minority that would severely endanger their rights. Therefore the minority has been
given the ability to keep from being trampled upon by a majority.
This
system of an Electoral College still stands, but several alternative methods have been
proposed over the years and this disputed election has brought the desire to reform or
remove the Electoral College back to the forefront of people's minds. Among these plans
are the district plan, the proportional plan, and the direct vote plan. Although
proponents of all these plans believe them superior, they are still inferior to the
current system.
First
among the alternate plans is the district plan. Under such a plan electoral votes would be
allocated by individual districts within a state. One of the problems with such a plan is
that it would reduce the traditional large margin of victory, which could lead to more
decisions on president being made by Congress. Also this would increase the trouble with
gerrymandering, the process of drawing district lines within a state to favor one
political party or the other.
The
proportional plan would allocate a state's electoral vote to each candidate according to
what percentage of votes that candidate received within that state. Although it is said
that this would make the popular vote more important, it would simply distort the popular
vote on the national scale.
The
third option, and the one that has received the most attention recently, is the direct
vote. Rather than change the way the electoral vote is decided this plan would make the
national popular vote the sole means for electing the president. This plan would totally
remove the republican form of election that has always been present in the Electoral
College. Also it would further increase the power of the large population centers to make
national policy and almost totally eliminate the views and needs of rural areas from the
presidential election. The best and most frequent argument for the direct vote plan
involves what the Founding Fathers intended when they created the Electoral College. They
say that it was created in a time when communications were slow and few people understood
what the needs of the country were on a national scale or about the people who were
candidates for president. And if those were the only reasons then now in a time of nearly
instant communications and where everyone has some amount of knowledge on the candidates
and their positions then it would indeed be outdated. But such considerations were only a
small part in the decision to use our current system. It was also meant to keep the larger
states from taking control from the smaller states without totally eliminating their
greater power due to a larger population. The Electoral College simply makes the field
slightly more level for the voice of the minority, and prevents a tyranny of the majority
from forming.
However,
in all the talk about election reform and different methods for the election more emphasis
needs to be placed on how and from where presidential campaigns receive their financing.
Brought to light after previous elections were large money contributions made by foreign
interests or perhaps even foreign governments. Such conduct is very disturbing because it
could cause undue influence on how these nations are dealt with by the United States. In
order to prevent such unpatriotic financing to continue in the future, a better and more
efficient system must be established to monitor fundraising. Such a system must first be
set up for the two parties which have the most influence, and then continue to the smaller
parties and interest groups which have lesser power.
So,
although currently many people are trying to put an end to the Electoral College, this
system, in fact, better represents the people and their interest than any other system
does. To replace the Electoral College would be very difficult, very expensive and totally
unnecessary. For the sake of our Great American Republic, we must remain true now to the
ideal of a balanced and equal government that our Founding Fathers created and has worked
well for more than two centuries.
Bibliography
How
the Electoral College Works. Online. Internet. Available
http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm
Green,
Mark. "Election 2000 shows Electoral College matters more than ever." Sunday
Oklahoman December 24, 2000: 9-A
"Electoral
College still faces own vote." Daily Oklahoman December 15, 2000: 9-A
Kelly,
Michael. "Historic rescue of democracy." Daily Oklahoman January 4, 2001:
8-A
Answers
to the required reading:
1.
In 1796 the system of making the winner of the Electoral Vote President and the runner-up
Vice President. These two men were resident John Adams of the Federalist Party and Vice
President Thomas Jefferson of the Republican Party.
2.
Four other ways to elect a president that were suggested between 1808 and 1846 were:
Election by lot, which would randomly choose from one candidate native to each state; A
direct vote plan where the popular vote would directly choose the president; An automatic
plan which would be the same as the electoral college only without the electors; And a
proportional plan wherein each states electoral votes would be divided among the
candidates according to the proportion of popular votes they got in that state.
3.
John Quincy Adams, Zachary Taylor, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Harrison, Woodrow Wilson.
4.
The winner-take-all system is where all of a states electoral votes go to the candidate
receiving the majority of the popular votes in that state. This system is n use by 49
states, with the exception being Maine.
5.
Electors vote on the Monday after the second Wednesday in September. The results of these
votes are known on January 6 when they are read before both Houses of Congress.
6.
Substituting a direct popular vote would increase the impact of third party candidates
because the Electoral College System makes it extra difficult for them to make much of a
showing in the national results.
7.
Four arguments for the direct vote system are the need for democracy, greater education
and more information about the candidates possessed by the voters, the popular vote is the
simplest way to choose a president, and it eliminates an archaic election system. Four
arguments against the direct vote system are that the Electoral system has worked for so
long, the direct vote plan reduces the margin of victory, would weaken the power of the
states, and state borders would become irrelevant.
8.
The district plan separates the states by their Congressional District and each district
gets one electoral vote for the winner of popular vote in that district. The proportional
plan allocates electoral votes to each candidate by the proportion of the popular vote
they received in that state.
9.
The four points agreed upon by experts in 1969 were the need for a quick decision and
clear cut winner, the victor should be the one with the most popular votes, the
president-elect should have a mandate from a large margin of victory, and should not
undermine the two party system.
10.
The Shrinkage Phenomenon refers to the public losing respect for a candidate just for
running. In America now it is expected that our leaders will be lesser men to the point
that we think less of candidates just for running. Also this creates the Sidelines
Magnifier, the exact reverse where those who choose not to run seem much grander than
those trying to get elected.