Electoral College Argument Analysis

As a country founded on the ideals of freedom and liberty, the United States of America created a Constitution with democracy at its core. Although the Framers strenuously debated on how democratic the Constitution should be, the product of their efforts produced a document that has served as the basis for the democratic republic that America is today. However, some individuals, such as Robert Dahl, a political theorist and an author, illustrate the specific areas of the Constitution that have failed to promote its democratic quality. One of his most tenacious arguments lies with the dysfunctionality of the Electoral College, which he regards as a major contribution to the undemocratic character of the Constitution. He provides two distinctive …show more content…
One argument is that a candidate with the greatest number of popular votes might not always win the election because they did not receive a majority of electoral votes (Dahl.79). His other argument is that the Electoral College causes an unequal representation of voters (Dahl.81). Both of these aspects are clearly undemocratic because it restricts the power of the popular majority and cause inequality in representation. In his argument, Dahl states that the most effective way to mitigate these undemocratic qualities of the Constitution is to pass an amendment that would “replace the electoral college with the direct election of the president by popular vote” (Dahl.86) He further states that if no candidate were to receive more than 50 percent of the popular vote, a runoff election between the top two candidates would occur (Dahl.86). By adopting the system of direct voting and abolishing the electoral college, it will eliminate all the issues which come with the existence of the Electoral College, including unequal representation and issues between the popular votes and electoral …show more content…
Known as the binding method proposed by author and professor Judith A. Best, it advocates for binding all electors federally, forcing them to vote based on their party if their nominee wins the state. Currently, there are 26 states in the U.S which has legal control over how their electors vote in the Electoral College (Fairvote) and uses their own form of the binding method. The positive side of this proposal is the prevention of “faithless electors” or those who go against their party candidate, ensuring that the people’s views are properly represented in the electoral college (Fairvote). However, the negative side is that it upholds the winner-take-all electoral system, which maintains the unrepresentative character of the electoral system (Fairvote). Along with the winner-take-all system, some electorates in the states who are currently utilizing the binding method find this law to be unconstitutional, for it restricts their ability to vote freely (Fairvote). Although the positive aspect of the binding method is appealing, the continuation of the winner-take-all system along with the potential unconstitutionality of the law denounces this