Should Electoral College Be Reformed Or Abolished?

1617 Words 7 Pages
Marisa Olson
Currie
American National Government
November 15, 2015

Should the Electoral College Be Reformed or Abolished?
The Electoral College is a part of our political system in our country. To fully understanding what it does, the way it’s changed, and also the problems it contributes to is difficult. In this essay I will be addressing the argument, should the electoral college be formed or should it be abolished? I will also be addressing both the pros and cons of either abolishing it or reforming it. The pros I address include; the recognition of small states votes, winning candidate gets majority vote, keeping us away from a recount, represents the country as a whole, certainty of income, makes having a two-party system easier, and
…show more content…
Candidates don’t visit every town of the battleground states and the citizens don’t have the opportunity to meet and ask all the questions they want to them. But this might also result from according to State University, a lack of votes. As they worded it “Presidential candidates might ignore states with small populations if not for the electoral college. Under the current system, candidates campaign in whichever states the election results are expected to be closest. Under a national popular vote, critics say, candidates would focus their attention on capturing areas with the most people and the most votes” (stateuniversity.com). Although, they do count smaller populated towns people votes greatly, they should do campaigning in these states to let these people’s voices be heard better. With smaller states the reason their percentage is so high is because the minimal number votes for a state to have is three. This leads to conflicts and the concern of not being fair because one man does not equal to one vote. (newsmax.com) Without the Electoral College around these days, these states wouldn’t even be noticed or counted …show more content…
An example or this would be in the 1992 election Clinton received close to 42% of the vote. But because of Ross Perot having an influence on him he won a convincing majority in the Electoral College. And with winning a majority, there a quit a few benefits. What you don’t want is the recognition by 2/3 of the population of the country, not wanting you right when you take office. The Electoral College stays away from the issue of no candidate gets a majority vote. Another example of this was in 1992 and 1969, Nixon and Clinton both had 43% of the popular votes and both also won a majority in the Electoral College. With run-off elections there is lots of pressure from candidates not winning majority of the votes cast. This complicates the election, although the Electoral College reduces that stress and gives the country a clear winner.

Related Documents