What would have happened if four presidents that have long since been entered into the history books had not been the ones elected? In 1876, 1888, 1960, and 2000, the popular vote and the Electoral College did not elect the same candidate. However, the Electoral College had the final decision. The latest discrepeancy between the two voting systems revived the debate about the best election method. George C. Edwards develops the argument about how the Electoral College, with a faulty system detrimental to democracy, should be replaced with direct election.
The Electoral College fails in protecting American citizens and candidates. It does not protect minorities or third parties. Many times the votes of the minorities do not affect the …show more content…
There is a balance between power of the states and power in the system that the founders created. If we get rid of the Electoral College, we will have to get rid of the senators. This would cause the country to become closer to the direct democracy that ancient Greece first had. However, this would cause the United States to move from a Republic to a Democracy. Yet, the founders did not build the United States to become a Democracy. (http://www.thisnation.com/question/011.html )Therefore, his view of every person having a direct vote to the president is invalid. The Electoral College is a large reminder of this difference. This institutionally, is not different from our method of electing representatives or senators. We elect representatives to vote for us on laws and issues as we vote, in essence, or our electoral representatives. Therefore, his argument that America’s democracy is in jeopardy is …show more content…
By voting the people can elect new representatives, senators, or even presidents to replace one that did not follow through with their agenda. Through the fear of not being elected once again, the elected officials will be more inclined to listen to the people. Between the people and government, this is the largest check and balance. When the system of electing becomes skewed against the people, it is a major cause of concern. The country was built on certain principles, and the people have a right to exercise these rights. The Electoral College, as this author believes, will destroy this major check and balance. What impact does this have on his view of the broader institutional setting? The system is not one of equality. Democracy should be where every vote and person’s opinion matters. However, in the Electoral College, the only votes that matter are where population is extraordinarily low. Also, when the people’s popular vote does not match the electoral winner, then the system fails. Therefore, the people’s choice does not matter. This causes him to believe that the institution is failing as a democracy.
There are two major limitations to Edwards’ argument. His bias is very noticeable throughout the book. This causes his support to become weakened since his is not providing a more balanced approach. Secondly, the United States was not built to emulate Greece and
The Electoral College fails in protecting American citizens and candidates. It does not protect minorities or third parties. Many times the votes of the minorities do not affect the …show more content…
There is a balance between power of the states and power in the system that the founders created. If we get rid of the Electoral College, we will have to get rid of the senators. This would cause the country to become closer to the direct democracy that ancient Greece first had. However, this would cause the United States to move from a Republic to a Democracy. Yet, the founders did not build the United States to become a Democracy. (http://www.thisnation.com/question/011.html )Therefore, his view of every person having a direct vote to the president is invalid. The Electoral College is a large reminder of this difference. This institutionally, is not different from our method of electing representatives or senators. We elect representatives to vote for us on laws and issues as we vote, in essence, or our electoral representatives. Therefore, his argument that America’s democracy is in jeopardy is …show more content…
By voting the people can elect new representatives, senators, or even presidents to replace one that did not follow through with their agenda. Through the fear of not being elected once again, the elected officials will be more inclined to listen to the people. Between the people and government, this is the largest check and balance. When the system of electing becomes skewed against the people, it is a major cause of concern. The country was built on certain principles, and the people have a right to exercise these rights. The Electoral College, as this author believes, will destroy this major check and balance. What impact does this have on his view of the broader institutional setting? The system is not one of equality. Democracy should be where every vote and person’s opinion matters. However, in the Electoral College, the only votes that matter are where population is extraordinarily low. Also, when the people’s popular vote does not match the electoral winner, then the system fails. Therefore, the people’s choice does not matter. This causes him to believe that the institution is failing as a democracy.
There are two major limitations to Edwards’ argument. His bias is very noticeable throughout the book. This causes his support to become weakened since his is not providing a more balanced approach. Secondly, the United States was not built to emulate Greece and