When the US Constitution was first drawn out, our fore fathers decided to create a second system of casting votes other than just the popular vote. This, of course, was thought to be as a means of checks and balances between the states and its’ government. The American republic was born, but there has always been a controversy with whether or not the Electoral College took power away from the popular vote. Established in Article II of the US Constitution, it sought to reconcile the interests between state and federal government.
Even though I disagree with the use of the Electoral College, I can understand that it is implemented in order for the rural regions and small states to have more say instead of allowing the most popular cities to cast votes …show more content…
I believe that there is room for compromise though. The best solution so far to me is: suppose we kept the Electoral College, and the advantages it gives to smaller states, yet make it more reflective of the population of the states. This could be accomplished simply by passing a law requiring proportional allocation of electoral votes per state. What if Congress replaced the "winner takes all" with a point system that gave proportional representation to each candidate. “For example, in Massachusetts, Clinton got 61 percent of the popular vote; under the current system she was awarded all 11 electoral votes. Under the proportional system she would have been given only 6.71 electoral votes; Trump would have received 3.74, and the minor candidates would have split the remaining fractional vote (Edmoston, CCT).” This would mean that each point received from the state would be equally represented and that the smaller states would still carry influence. It isn’t fair to give all of a state’s tickets to one candidate if there is room for debate between
Even though I disagree with the use of the Electoral College, I can understand that it is implemented in order for the rural regions and small states to have more say instead of allowing the most popular cities to cast votes …show more content…
I believe that there is room for compromise though. The best solution so far to me is: suppose we kept the Electoral College, and the advantages it gives to smaller states, yet make it more reflective of the population of the states. This could be accomplished simply by passing a law requiring proportional allocation of electoral votes per state. What if Congress replaced the "winner takes all" with a point system that gave proportional representation to each candidate. “For example, in Massachusetts, Clinton got 61 percent of the popular vote; under the current system she was awarded all 11 electoral votes. Under the proportional system she would have been given only 6.71 electoral votes; Trump would have received 3.74, and the minor candidates would have split the remaining fractional vote (Edmoston, CCT).” This would mean that each point received from the state would be equally represented and that the smaller states would still carry influence. It isn’t fair to give all of a state’s tickets to one candidate if there is room for debate between