“Every citizen’s vote should count in America, not just the votes of the partisan insiders in the Electoral College. The Electoral College was necessary when communications were poor, literacy was low, and voters lacked information about out-of-state figures, which is clearly no longer the case.” This quote by Representative Gene Green reveals the faults in our current presidential voting system and the need for it to change. It has been an example and a basis to newly formed democracies all over the world, but the election to choose our nation’s leader isn’t as fair as it seems. While every citizen’s voice is heard in the public polls, ultimately it’s the Electors’ votes that select the new president. Therefore, I believe that our election
…show more content…
Our current voting system has many negative effects on elections and the voters that participate in them all across the United States. Page stated that in our last election almost 90 million Americans said they weren’t going to vote in a survey conducted by Suffolk University. One of their main reasons was that their votes didn’t matter in choosing a new president. The knowledge that their votes don’t actually count in the presidential election discourages many people from voting in a country whose main principle is citizen participation in government. More people would be encouraged to vote if their votes mattered and had a larger impact in the goings-on in their country. Our current system also encourages a two-party system that stops any third-party candidate from having a chance. It is extremely difficult for a new or minority party to have a chance at winning the presidential election. This system forces those candidates to either join the two main parties or give up (Kimberling). Even though some third-party …show more content…
The popular vote isn’t always the one that decides the election. In the history of the United States four candidates have become president even though they didn’t win the popular vote. George Bush won the 2000 election even though he lost the popular vote to Al Gore who had 48% of the popular votes while Bush only had 47%. However, he received 5 more electoral votes which is how he became president (Kimberling). Since results are based on the number of electoral votes and not the number of popular votes, presidential candidates can still win the election even if the nation voted for the other candidate. If the popular votes counted instead of the electoral ones, the candidate we wanted would win, not the one that won because he had the votes of larger states. Problems with representation are also caused by the differing number of votes that states receive because of population. Noble said that there is one electoral vote in California for every 705,454 people. While in Wyoming, there’s one electoral vote for every 194,717 people. Because of this uneven system, one electoral vote does not represent just one person. A small state’s vote, like Wyoming, has more deciding power and is worth more than in a large state like California. A vote cast would equal one vote in the tally for president if the Electors didn’t vote on behalf of everyone. The public view
Our current voting system has many negative effects on elections and the voters that participate in them all across the United States. Page stated that in our last election almost 90 million Americans said they weren’t going to vote in a survey conducted by Suffolk University. One of their main reasons was that their votes didn’t matter in choosing a new president. The knowledge that their votes don’t actually count in the presidential election discourages many people from voting in a country whose main principle is citizen participation in government. More people would be encouraged to vote if their votes mattered and had a larger impact in the goings-on in their country. Our current system also encourages a two-party system that stops any third-party candidate from having a chance. It is extremely difficult for a new or minority party to have a chance at winning the presidential election. This system forces those candidates to either join the two main parties or give up (Kimberling). Even though some third-party …show more content…
The popular vote isn’t always the one that decides the election. In the history of the United States four candidates have become president even though they didn’t win the popular vote. George Bush won the 2000 election even though he lost the popular vote to Al Gore who had 48% of the popular votes while Bush only had 47%. However, he received 5 more electoral votes which is how he became president (Kimberling). Since results are based on the number of electoral votes and not the number of popular votes, presidential candidates can still win the election even if the nation voted for the other candidate. If the popular votes counted instead of the electoral ones, the candidate we wanted would win, not the one that won because he had the votes of larger states. Problems with representation are also caused by the differing number of votes that states receive because of population. Noble said that there is one electoral vote in California for every 705,454 people. While in Wyoming, there’s one electoral vote for every 194,717 people. Because of this uneven system, one electoral vote does not represent just one person. A small state’s vote, like Wyoming, has more deciding power and is worth more than in a large state like California. A vote cast would equal one vote in the tally for president if the Electors didn’t vote on behalf of everyone. The public view