Rethinking Presidential Elections

The presidency and the election process surrounding this pivotal office is among the most significant events in American politics. The President of the United States occupies the highest office in the land, bearing immense responsibility and influence. Given this reality, it is unsurprising that controversy often surrounds how individuals are elected to this esteemed position. At first glance, one might assume that American citizens directly elect their president; however, this is not technically the case. To truly understand the presidential election process in the United States, one must first examine the role and function of the Electoral College.

The Electoral College

The Electoral College is a body of 538 electors, representing the states, who cast votes for the election of the president and vice president. According to the United States Census Bureau, the U.S. population was approximately 325.7 million people in 2017. This means that 538 electors are responsible for making decisions that affect the lives of over 325 million individuals. When the Electoral College was established, the population of the United States was significantly smaller, and this system made more sense as a representative mechanism. However, as American society has evolved, the political and social norms have shifted considerably since the nation's founding. Therefore, it is pertinent to question whether the Electoral College remains the most effective mechanism for electing a president. Exploring alternatives to this system may be beneficial for the continued development and sustainability of American democracy. This essay will discuss three potential alternatives, with the aim of sparking conversation and prompting change in the current political system.

Election by Congress

Election by Congress could serve as a compromise between those who wish to abolish the Electoral College and those who want to preserve it. Both houses of Congress are filled with members elected by direct popular vote. Senators are chosen through statewide votes, while representatives are elected by voters within each congressional district. In theory, if citizens actively participate in elections, then Congress should consist of individuals chosen by the people. Therefore, it might seem logical to entrust these elected officials with the responsibility of selecting the President. Members of Congress are presumed to be well-educated on political matters and capable of making informed decisions about the nation's leadership. However, this approach raises questions about the democratic nature of American governance, as it removes the direct voting power of the populace after congressional elections. Moreover, this method could still suffer from issues similar to those of the Electoral College, such as potential corruption and lack of direct representation for individual voters. Despite these concerns, election by Congress may offer some improvements over the current system.

Instant Runoff Elections

Instant Runoff Elections (IRV) would maintain the necessity for American citizens to vote directly for the President, ensuring that their voices are heard and candidates must engage with the public. Under this system, voters rank their preferences rather than selecting just one candidate. If no candidate secures a majority, the one with the fewest votes is eliminated, and ballots are recounted, considering the second-choice preferences of the eliminated candidate's voters. This process repeats until a candidate achieves a majority. Instant Runoff Elections on a national scale could address significant issues posed by the Electoral College by producing a majority winner chosen entirely by the people. This method discourages negative campaigning, as candidates must appeal to a broader base to secure second-choice votes. Unlike plurality voting, which often compels citizens to choose "the lesser of two evils," IRV allows voters to support their preferred candidates, offering them a genuine chance to win based on public support.

However, IRV is not without its challenges. There is a possibility that a majority winner may not be found if voters do not adequately rank their lower preferences. Additionally, the process could prove more costly than the current system, as manual ballot counting would require significant labor, potentially leading to errors. Alternatively, an electronic system may be expensive to implement. Nevertheless, IRV has the potential to increase voter turnout and enhance public engagement in the electoral process, making citizens feel that their votes genuinely matter.

Direct Vote

The most straightforward alternative to the Electoral College might be a direct vote system. The United States often identifies as a democracy, yet it operates more as a republic. A direct vote would align with democratic ideals by allowing each citizen to cast one vote for their preferred candidate, with the individual receiving the most votes nationwide winning the presidency. This method would more accurately reflect the will of the people, eliminating the need for recounts like those in IRV. Direct voting would encourage voter participation and align with democratic principles. However, it poses a risk of "regional candidates" gaining prominence, where individuals popular in populous urban areas could win without broader national support, potentially leading to a fragmented government and society. Despite these concerns, if the United States aims to uphold its democratic values, the advantages of direct voting may outweigh the disadvantages.

Conclusion

The Electoral College presents several significant flaws, most notably the risk that a candidate who loses the popular vote may still win the presidency, as demonstrated in the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. While Gore won the popular vote, Bush secured the presidency through the Electoral College. This issue is shared by some of the alternatives discussed, but these alternatives offer a more direct reflection of the people's will, making each vote truly matter. The presidency is vital to the United States, and Americans deserve a more substantial voice in the election of their leader. It is arguable whether the Electoral College was ever suitable for a democratic nation, but it is clear that the system is outdated and requires reform. Although the Electoral College may have some advantages, its disadvantages far outweigh the benefits. Therefore, it is imperative to explore and implement modifications to protect the democratic governance of the United States. Without these adjustments, the country risks continued discord and disillusionment in its democratic processes. By examining and discussing viable alternatives such as election by Congress, Instant Runoff Elections, and direct voting, the nation can move toward a more representative and equitable electoral system, ensuring that the voice of every American is heard in the selection of their President.

Did you like this example?

602

32