Civics Persuasive Essay
Fresh out of the presidential election of 2000, many people were convinced that the electoral college had to go. In the Gore vs Bush election, Bush had come out the winner, although only in the electoral college. Surprisingly, in a rare turn of events, Gore exceeded Bush in popular votes, and it was only through a long scuffle over the state of Florida that Bush finally won the presidency. For a great portion of the population, approximately 62% according to an article on Gallup by Lydia Saad, it was time to amend the constitution and replace the electoral voting system with strictly popular vote as the means of attaining the presidency. I, on the other hand, after investigating the issue years later, have decided otherwise, that it is best to hold onto the institution of the electoral college when electing a president. I believe the electoral college is the way to go for a collection of …show more content…
In Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution, states are guaranteed representation in the presidential election. This is important and ethical, just another tier of the separation of powers, an important government principle. If the popular vote replaced the electoral college as the means of electing the president, more power would go to the people and less to the state; balance, which is important, would be compromised.
For all these reasons, it is clear to me that the electoral college must be preserved. The electoral college makes the most sense ethically, emotionally, and logically, as demonstrated through the points I have presented. While people have said, like after the 2000 election that the electoral college causes too many complications, I believe the benefits far outweigh these complications. I acknowledge the fact that some flaws exist, but in what government system to flaws not exist. Not a single one. It is then important to choose the system with more good than bad, and that is the electoral
Fresh out of the presidential election of 2000, many people were convinced that the electoral college had to go. In the Gore vs Bush election, Bush had come out the winner, although only in the electoral college. Surprisingly, in a rare turn of events, Gore exceeded Bush in popular votes, and it was only through a long scuffle over the state of Florida that Bush finally won the presidency. For a great portion of the population, approximately 62% according to an article on Gallup by Lydia Saad, it was time to amend the constitution and replace the electoral voting system with strictly popular vote as the means of attaining the presidency. I, on the other hand, after investigating the issue years later, have decided otherwise, that it is best to hold onto the institution of the electoral college when electing a president. I believe the electoral college is the way to go for a collection of …show more content…
In Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution, states are guaranteed representation in the presidential election. This is important and ethical, just another tier of the separation of powers, an important government principle. If the popular vote replaced the electoral college as the means of electing the president, more power would go to the people and less to the state; balance, which is important, would be compromised.
For all these reasons, it is clear to me that the electoral college must be preserved. The electoral college makes the most sense ethically, emotionally, and logically, as demonstrated through the points I have presented. While people have said, like after the 2000 election that the electoral college causes too many complications, I believe the benefits far outweigh these complications. I acknowledge the fact that some flaws exist, but in what government system to flaws not exist. Not a single one. It is then important to choose the system with more good than bad, and that is the electoral