Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Research Paper:
Electoral College System
The Presidential Elections of 2000 have once again raised doubts regarding the effectiveness of the electoral college system. A straight accounting of the popular vote showed that Democratic candidate Al Gore had a lead of over 500,000 votes over his opponent, George W. Bush. The Supreme Court was thus forced to assume the role of electoral arbiter for Florida's vote count, which resulted in the latter's victory via Electoral College votes.
This paper argues that the scenario described above is just one of the reasons why the Electoral College should be abolished. The United States should instead adopt a popular vote system, where each citizen gets one vote.
The first part of this paper looks at the composition of the Electoral College, and studies what conditions led to this body's creation in the first place. The subsequent discussions then detail why the current political and social climate no longer necessitate the Electoral College system. First, this paper points out that concerns such as slavery and presidential independence are no longer relevant today. Second, the paper argues that many other pro-Electoral College arguments regarding state rights do not hold water. The paper then looks at the issue empirically, by investigating how the Electoral College disenfranchises the popular vote and could almost raise further complications that call for "contingent elections."
The founders of the country's Constitutional Convention have created the Electoral College system, but they most likely did not intend the problems that this cumbersome system raised. They also likely did not intend the system to be the antithesis of egalitarian institutions. This paper therefore maintains that the Electoral College should be replaced, and a more democratic system put in its place.
Origins and composition
The Electoral College system rests on the principle that states play a significant part in deciding national politics. The number of a state's electoral votes is equal to the number of its senators and representatives, with the District of Columbia being allocated three votes. This comes to a total of 538 electoral votes. To win a presidential election, a candidate thus has to carry at least half the number of electoral votes (Wilson and DiLulio 373).
The task of gaining the majority of electoral college votes is mitigated by the "all or nothing" system of counting electoral votes. Maine and Nebraska are the two exceptions, where the number of electoral votes can be split between the candidates on the basis of their popular vote totals. In all other states, however, the candidate who wins a simple majority of the popular votes is awarded all the state's electoral votes as well (Wilson and DiLulio 373).
It is this "winner take all" system of counting electoral votes that allows a candidate to win the presidency even without winning the popular vote. This is one of the greatest criticisms lobbed against this institution.
The Electoral College was founded on the antithesis to democratic institutions. In essence, it allowed for certain knowledgeable individuals to meet in isolation in their respective states. Ideally, these men (as women were not allowed to participate in the eighteenth century) would make decisions for the good of their community.
Apologists for the Electoral College argue that these limitations were necessary, because founding fathers were largely skeptical of the critical faculties of voters. These reasons were particularly relevant during times of slavery, as an effective way of further disenfranchising minority populations.
However, critics like George Edwards argues that the factors that gave rise to the electoral college. Slavery has long been abolished, and most of the voters are literate. People are aware of the importance of education themselves about the issues of an election. Edwards further notes that the abolition of slavery has lessened the chance of destructive conflict between the different states (Edwards 78).
Another compelling reason often put forth by Electoral College supporters is the issue of state rights. Authors like Bernard Grofman and Scott Feld reported that states rights activists were worried that smaller states would be unfairly looked over in a popular vote (1). By allotting these states set electoral votes, the system therefore guards against the possibility that larger states impose their will over states with smaller…[continue]
"Abolition Of Electoral College" (2006, December 13) Retrieved October 23, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/abolition-of-electoral-college-72926
"Abolition Of Electoral College" 13 December 2006. Web.23 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/abolition-of-electoral-college-72926>
"Abolition Of Electoral College", 13 December 2006, Accessed.23 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/abolition-of-electoral-college-72926
Electoral College: Should the U.S. Push for Reform or Elimination? When citizens of the United States vote in a presidential election, many believe that they are taking part in a direct election of the president (Sutin 2003). However, because of the existence of the electoral college, established in the U.S. Constitution, this is not really true. The electoral college is a set group of "electors" who are nominated by political activists and
The Constitution is based on several key principals the most notable would include: separation of powers as well as checks and balances. Separation of powers is when there are clearly defined powers that are given to the various branches of: the government, the federal government and the states. Checks and balances is when one branch of the government will have the power to the check the authority of another
Slavery, The Civil War and the Preservation of the Union In the face of oppression and harsh treatment, slaves formed communities as a coping mechanism and to resist the belief that they were simply property. Members of these slave communities came together often to sing, talk, and even plan covert plots to runaway or sabotage the system in which they were living. Slaves married, had children and worked to keep their
" Then there are the "...5 million employees of the federal bureaucracy and the military" at his disposal. Also, the president runs the executive branch of government; Cummings writes that he is "chief of state" - the "ceremonial and symbolic head of state as well as head of government" (391) - as well as being "chief executive" of the government. He has the power to "grant reprieves and pardons for offenses
The first Great Awakening in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries became a harbinger of the later, more vocal and radical abolitionist movements. The Maryland Abolition Society was another early abolitionist group. Some abolitionist movements espoused violent means to obtain full freedom for slaves, and John Brown is one of the most notorious advocates of radical means. In 1817, a group of wealthy white males founded the American Colonization
Criminal Justice System Australian Criminal Justice System "When all is said and done, the current criminal justice system is about as fair and effective as we can reasonably expect" Overview of the Criminal Justice System: Fair and Effective - Penal Populism The Democracy at Work thesis proposes that politicians have been properly responsive to public concern about crime by putting into place the more robust responses to offending which people want. An alternative perspective
There were the growth organizations like Ku Klux Klan. Their aggressions kept away the African-Americans and the white Republicans from voting and gradually the radical Republican governments were overthrown. Their disintegration was enhanced by the death of the old radical leaders in Congress like Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Summer and by the disclosure of internal corruption in the radical Republican government. The Grant government was forced to decline its