US Election: Raising Controversies on Fairness of System - Essay Sample

Introduction

The election is one of the essential processes in every nation. In democratic countries, citizens vote for their candidate of choice, who can represent their interests at the national level. It is worth noting that election is a central part of a democratic system where citizens are allowed to influence any political activity of the country. In the US, the electoral process has raised a lot of controversy as to the fairness of the election system. Many have argued that the US is the mother of democracy, and for that reason, believe that the country's electoral process is transparent and fair.

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

Save 25%

On the other hand, arguments against the US system of the election have occurred. The US presidential election system was first formulated by Article II of the constitution. This system relies on the Electoral College; a body formed to elect the president and the vice president. However, many people have argued that this system is unfair because it does not represent the views of the majority. From an individual perspective, the US system of election is unjust because it seems to disregard the majority votes.

Argument in support of fairness of the US election process indicates that US elections are democratic. Every citizen is allowed to exercise their constitutional right to vote, and this explains the democracy behind the US polls (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). The entire system is also established with simplicity. After casting the votes, they are counted, and the results are announced in favor of the candidate who receives the highest votes. This system empowers the citizens to cast their votes freely. The fairness of the system is observed from the election process adopted by the US government. Local elections carried out by every state also ensures that the polls are carried out in an environment that is familiar to the locals as opposed to the outside authorities, as this is likely to disrupt the process and cause conflict.

Another argument suggests that the US election process is fair because it is open to the media. All the electoral procedures are available in the media, which allows the media to identify any irregularity and present it to the public (Belenky, 2012). In fact, election fairness is more evident when different programs and news are organized during polls. These programs revolve around the debates on the election process. Media plays a central role in motivating the public to take part in the election by creating awareness. Through the effort of the media, most US population is aware of the benefits of participating in elections.

The electoral process in the US begins with the once a decade census. The outcome of the US census helps identify the formation of the voting districts. Lawmakers have worked since the democratization of the US to ensure that the new districts formed were fair to every member irrespective of race or socioeconomic status (Kropf & Kimball, 2013). The approach used to accommodate everybody is often known as ''gerrymandering'' and can lead to the establishment of interestingly shaped districts. The method of using the US census to streamline districts is as perfect as the data gathered from people completing the form. Each person completing the form participates in making the electoral process fairer.

After the formation and vetting of local, state, and national districts by various groups interested in these districts, the fairness of the election process can be viewed. Elections begin with campaigns, and the integrity of the US election process has a lot of loopholes during these campaigns (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). First, the amount of money spent on elections attracts unfairness of the process. The system is developed in a way that benefits candidates with sufficient funds or political network. This scenario means that potentially qualified candidates are likely to be barred from the process due to insufficient funds or a lack of political system (Belenky, 2012). One example of such occurrence is the political dynasty of the Bush family. The senior George Bush served successfully at the local, state, and national government, which opened the door for his son George Bush Junior to serve in the same political path as his father.

The Electoral College is another critical aspect that determines the fairness of US election process. The Electoral College is a body that looks that the US congress. The body determines the winning candidate in the presidential election (Belenky, 2012). Contrary to many democratic countries that depend on the popular vote, the US declares the president using the college vote. Apparently, all citizens take part in the popular vote of the president and the vice president. They also elect every state's representative to the Electoral College. Often, people selected as electors in the college are those who swear allegiance to a particular party. Occasionally, they operate under state laws that vary depending on the state (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). It is necessary to note the Electoral College has a different number of representatives in each state due to the difference in the population of these states. For that reason, every state has a definite number of electors who vote for a particular candidate.

The Electoral College then identifies the winner of the presidential race. The candidate who receives the majority of 538 college votes becomes the president-elect (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). This process is marred with limited fairness in many ways. First, the popular vote is of little regard in the US. However, the vote represents the opinion of each citizen who is eligible to vote. Despite the popular vote representing the majority voice, the system of election disregards it and relies on the college vote to declare the president. This process invalidates the individual vote and shows indirectly that the votes of the citizens are irrelevant. Several cases where a candidate won in a popular vote but lost the election process due to the influence of Electoral College have occurred. An example of this case is the 2000 presidential elections that involved Gore and Bush (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). Al Gore won the popular vote, but the popular vote decided that Bush has won.

Paradoxically, the majority voice that the popular votes represented had proven insignificant. The people who voted during this election termed it ''unfair,'' and in such cases, the US election process is unfair. It is not correct that a small group of electors support their candidate, who becomes the designated president considering the fact that the majority of voters support a different politician (Kropf & Kimball, 2013). Of course, these electors should represent the opinion of the public, sometimes their viewpoints differ. In other words, although the US relies on the Electoral College, the truth holds that the body does not sufficiently represent the voice of the majority citizens of the US.

Another aspect that shows unfairness in the US election process is the variations and abuses in the US election. In some states, citizens with criminal records are not allowed to participate in polls. Some states require a candidate to own a driving license only, whereas, in other states, the driving license does not authorize a person to take part in the elections (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). This shows how the system is different in the country. These activities violate the basic rule of democracy, which requires simplicity and uniformity of the electoral process.

Another conflict exists in different states concerning the US election process. For instance, the US elections are organized locally within each state, but the state offices conduct the process. This procedure automatically compromises the fairness of the system. Various reports have stated that some officials of these states often alter the election results to favor a particular candidate or party (Belenky, 2012). This favoritism is an indication of irregularity, which questions the fairness of the US election process. More riots and abuse also do occur in various campaigns, primarily when the results focus on one state. Such cases were witnessed in the 2004 election in Florida and Ohio.

From an individual perspective, the US election system is unfair because it seems to disregard the majority of votes. It is common in the US that the winner of the countrywide popular vote can quickly lose the presidency. An excellent example of this case was the 2000 elections when Al Gore was ahead of George Bush with more than a half-million votes nationwide. However, Bush won the presidency after he was declared the winner with approximately 537 electoral votes (Azevedo, Jost, & Rothmund, 2017). Despite the popular vote representing the majority voice, the system of election disregards it and relies on the college vote to declare the president. This process invalidates the individual vote and shows indirectly that the votes of the citizens are irrelevant.

Conclusion

Overall, the US election system has, for a long time, faced conspiracies, especially when it comes to the casting of votes and declaring the winning candidate in the presidential election. History provides substantial proof of the unfair allegations due to the polling process. From a personal point of view, from an individual perspective, the US election system is unfair because it seems to disregard the majority of votes. It is common in the US that the winner of the countrywide popular vote can quickly lose the presidency. An excellent example of this case was the 2000 elections when Al Gore was ahead of George Bush with more than a half-million votes nationwide. However, Bush won the presidency after he was declared the winner with the votes of the Electoral College. Despite the popular vote representing the majority voice, the system of election disregards it and relies on the college vote to declare the president. This process invalidates the individual vote and shows indirectly that the votes of the citizens are irrelevant.

References

Azevedo, F., Jost, J. T., & Rothmund, T. (2017). "Making America great again": System justification in the US presidential election of 2016. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 231.

Belenky, A. S. (2012). Understanding the fundamentals of the US presidential election system. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

Kropf, M., & Kimball, D. C. (2013). Helping America vote: The limits of election reform. Abingdon: Routledge.