The Electoral College: a System under Scrutiny

The Electoral College was created in 1787 by the framers who composed the U.S. Constitution. Its establishment, detailed in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, was intended to streamline and refine the presidential election process. The founding politicians believed that relying solely on a popular vote could lead to disproportionate influence from densely populated areas overly familiar with presidential candidates (Bonsor, Kevin, and Dove, 1-6). Thus, they devised a system to balance representation across the nation.

The Electoral College

Despite its historical intent, the Electoral College has become a subject of controversy regarding its fairness and whether it truly provides the American populace with a voice.

Article II of the Constitution outlines the system as consisting of 538 electors, which includes 100 senators, 435 representatives, and 3 electors allocated to the District of Columbia. This system is the backbone of the American presidential election process.

Every four years, citizens participate in what is known as the popular vote, casting their ballots for their preferred presidential and vice-presidential candidates. Simultaneously, they elect senators and representatives who, in turn, cast the electoral votes. Each state is allocated a number of electors proportional to its population, and the candidate who secures at least 270 electoral votes wins the presidency. However, Nebraska and Maine deviate slightly by assigning electoral votes through proportional representation, as highlighted by the Huffington Post: "electoral votes are assigned by proportional representation, meaning that the top vote-getter in those states wins two electoral votes (for the two Senators) while the remaining electoral votes are allocated congressional district by congressional district" (Soni,1-2).

Historical Evolution

The electoral process we know today was shaped by historical amendments and political challenges. Initially, electors cast votes without candidates running as pairs, leading to the presidential victor being the candidate with the most votes, while the runner-up became vice president. This method proved problematic, as seen in 1786 when President John Adams and Vice President Thomas Jefferson, from opposing parties, were elected, resulting in political discord. The election of 1800 further exposed flaws when Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, both Democratic-Republican candidates, tied in votes, necessitating intervention from the House of Representatives, which voted 36 times before Jefferson was declared president. The

Introduction

of the 12th Amendment aimed to resolve such issues by allowing candidates to run as a ticket, hence improving political cohesion.

Nevertheless, questions remain about whether this system truly embodies democratic principles. According to Merriam-Webster, democracy is defined as "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections." If supreme power is genuinely vested in the people, why does the Electoral College exist, allowing a candidate to win the presidency without a majority popular vote?

A Call for Reform

The 2016 election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump starkly highlighted this democratic dilemma. Despite Clinton receiving three million more popular votes, she did not win the presidency, illustrating how the Electoral College can override the will of the majority. Additionally, the phenomenon of "faithless electors," who may vote contrary to their party's candidate, further undermines public trust. Although such instances have not yet altered an election outcome, the potential remains (Miller, 3).

This system's capacity to silence the majority's voice in favor of a minority of 538 electors challenges the essence of democracy. To address this, civic engagement and informed voting are crucial. Educating peers about their rights and responsibilities, participating in town hall meetings, and scrutinizing the stances of senators and representatives are essential steps toward reform. By holding elected officials accountable and advocating for change, we can work toward realizing the democratic ideals America promises—a true democracy where every vote is counted and valued.

In conclusion, the Electoral College, while historically significant, requires reevaluation to align with contemporary democratic values. Its complexity and potential to disregard the popular will necessitate informed discourse and action to ensure that the United States can honestly claim to vest supreme power in its people. Only through persistent advocacy and engagement can the foundational promise of democracy be truly fulfilled.

Did you like this example?

1157

48