Reconsidering the Electoral College: Challenges to Democracy and Calls for Reform - Essay Sample

The electoral college system is the overall process of the election of a President in the United States of America. The developers of the USA's constitution created the electoral college system so that it could act as an alternative for electing the President through the popular vote and the Congress (Young). Each state in America must elect a representative to the Electoral College. The number of representatives elected must be equal to the number of the state’s Senators and the state’s number of delegates in the House of Representatives. Because each state has two Senators and one congress representative following the USA constitution, the number of representatives to the electoral college per state must be three. In states without representation in Congress, such as Columbia, they have three electoral college representatives.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The current Electoral College has 538 electors, and a Presidential candidate must win a minimum of 270 votes from the Electoral College. Although the Electoral College was formed centuries ago in the late 1780s and has been conducting the US elections since then, there have been several issues that undermine democracy arising from the system (Dufour). While the Electoral College was formed to enhance democracy, and justice and prevent unfair political influence on the elections, it has failed to do so on several occasions. Therefore, banning the electoral college system will be the most appropriate measure to guarantee democracy for American citizens. The system can unfairly deny the candidate with the most votes victory.

The founding fathers of the electoral college system created it intending to avoid corruption in the national election by ensuring that in a general election, voters only vote for a representative in the electoral process and not the actual President. Those who are voted to represent their states in the electoral college then elect a representative president who will, in turn, represent the states. While the American constitution states that every citizen has a democratic right to elect their President, there have been several instances in which a President has been selected by the popular vote from the citizens but failed to be elected by the electoral college and ultimately failed to be the President. Example of presidents who ascended to power because of the electoral college and not the popular vote includes President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876 and President Benjamin Harris in 1888. In the 1824 elections, Andrew Jackson won the popular vote but failed to win the electoral college vote. Therefore, it did not secure the President, and John Quincy Adams instead won the election through the electoral college vote (Young).

The electoral college system is advantageous to Americans in that it ensures that the opinion of all people in both small and big states is taken into consideration. The 'winner-takes-all' system ensures that the people's power in the small states is not diffused by the power of the people in the large states. If the elections were solely based on the popular vote, then the small votes would lose relevance in the American elections because presidential candidates would only focus on the big and highly populated states. Additionally, the electoral college system helps to enhance coalitions between political parties in the USA because the electoral system requires the presidential candidate to have a sufficient distribution of support from voters across the country and within the population, which no single party can achieve and thus, the need for collaboration (Young).

One of the electoral college system's main disadvantages is that a candidate can ascend to the presidency without being elected by the popular vote. Because the minimum number of representatives for a state in the Electoral College is three, it implies that the percentage of the electoral votes for small states is higher than the state's percentage of the total population in America compared to bigger states with a higher percentage of the American people. This means that a candidate who has won the popular vote in a small state will be assigned the same number of electoral votes as the candidate who has won the popular vote in a bigger state (Young).

Another disadvantage of the electoral college system is that it makes the presidential candidates only focus on the ‘swing states’ that are often highly competitive to win the elections and not the ‘safe states’ that are not competitive and are either entirely for the Democrats or Republicans. The selective focus on presidential candidates in the ‘swing states’ while neglecting the ‘safe states’ gives an impression that the 'swing states' are more important than the 'safe states,' which can then be translated as undemocratic.

While the electoral college system was created with the right intentions, it has compromised the very fundamental reasons why it was made, and it should thus be banned. One of the main reasons the electoral college system should be banned is that it undermines the democracy of the people. The system has failed to protect the popular vote opinion by giving power to candidates not elected by the population but by the electoral college. For instance, in the 2016 Presidential election between Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump, although Clinton had the popular vote with over two million votes ahead of Trump, she failed to become the President because she was not elected by the electoral college Trump became the President. Among others, the 2016 presidential elections are a clear indication of how undemocratic the electoral college system is. Even though the citizens have the democratic right to vote and are allowed to vote, their votes are not as important as the votes of the electoral college system representatives (Chafetz).

Another reason why the electoral college system should be banned is that it is a threat to justice. When a candidate who was genuinely elected by the popular vote loses in an election, and the candidate who had lost in the popular vote wins the election, then an act of injustice is committed. Candidates who have won an election by the popular majority should be allowed to lead if democracy and justice are to be upheld. Besides, when a candidate has won the popular vote and lost in the electoral college vote, there is no opportunity for them to contest in a court of law because the electoral college system is constitutional. The inability of the Electoral College decision to be challenged in a court of law further undermines justice. As such, banning the Electoral College would be an essential step in serving justice (Chafetz).

Unfair political influence is yet another reason why the electoral college system should be banned. In recent days, the electoral college system has been accused of a high level of inequality compared to the electoral college system of the past. Today's electoral college has often fallen out of its mandate and parameters and is prone to political influence. The electoral college representatives are supposed to vote for their party's candidate faithfully, but often, they are politically influenced to vote for someone else other than their candidate. This unfair political influence has a significant effect on the outcome of an election. To counter the influence, banning the electoral college system would be a solution (Kaplan).

Incompetency is the fourth reason why the electoral college system should be banned. The candidate elected by the popular vote is more likely to be competent because most of the population has vetted them and ascertained that they are qualified and able to lead the country. A candidate who fails in the popular vote implies that most of the population views the candidate as incompetent and unfit to lead them. Thus, when an electoral college system gives power to a candidate who had failed in the popular vote, it means that they are giving power to someone incompetent and unfit for the leadership position.

Those who argue against banning the Electoral College system argue that the Electoral College system helps keep a check on the general population because they make a poor presidential choice. The argument is supported by the fact that voters are sometimes influenced to decide on a candidate, not because of their competency or fit for the job but because they have been paid to support them. In that case, the argument is that the electoral college will help counter the influence and instead make the right decision.

Another counterargument is that by solely following the popular vote, the rural areas where politicians often visit would be ignored. It is argued that because politicians spend most of their time campaigning in big cities, the rural voters are often overlooked, and thus, the electoral college helps to counter that.

From the above arguments, it is clear that banning the electoral college system would be necessary for upholding the democracy and justice of Americans. The electoral college system should then be replaced with another voting method where the popular votes play a critical role in determining who ascends to the presidency.

Works Cited

Chafetz, Josh. “Why We Should Abolish the Electoral College.” The New York Times, 17 Mar. 2020,www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/books/review/let-the-people-pick-the-president-jesse-wegman.html

Dufour, Fritz. “Is the US Electoral College a Polite Fiction That Should Be Abolished?” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017, doi:10.2139/ssrn.3082282.

Kaplan, Alex. “America’s Electoral Problem: The Shortcomings of the Electoral College in Contemporary American Democracy.” Senior Theses and Projects, July 2019, digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses/786/.

Young, Cheyenne. “The Electoral College and the Winner Takes All System.” Honors Undergraduate Theses, Jan. 2020, stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses/804/.