Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~Martin Luther King Jr. Because this statement is true, concerned citizens should not remain silent about the injustice of the current voting system of the United States. There are many problems with the United States voting system, but the most evident problem is its lack of fairness. The current U.S. voting system is unfair.
One reason the U.S. voting system is unfair is the Electoral College. The Electoral College Isn’t required to vote for the candidate that the majority of the people in that state voted for. According to David Walbert, from Learnnc.org “In November of a presidential election year, each state holds an election for president in which all eligible citizens …show more content…
citizens living in U.S. territories are underrepresented. This can be seen by the fact that citizens living in U.S. territories are not allowed to vote. According to an article by Hunter Schwarz on the Washington Post, dated March 9, 2015 “Residents of America 's island territories can 't vote because the Supreme Court found in a series of early 20th century decisions that they belonged to the United States but were "not a part" of the United States. The decisions also found the territories were inhabited by "alien races" who might not be able to understand Anglo-Saxon laws, so the U.S. Constitution didn 't have to apply.” (Schwarz). This means that the reason the U.S. still doesn’t allow citizens living in territories to vote is because of a decision that also said racist things about the people living in the territories. This is an outdated decision and the U.S. citizens who live in the U.S. territories should have a right to vote for their president. Also the U.S. territories have representatives in the house, but the representatives have non-voting seats. According to history.house.gov “five, non-voting Delegates represent the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. A non-voting Resident Commissioner, serving a four-year term, represents the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.” (“Determining …show more content…
were a complete democracy, the smaller states would get a smaller say. According to an article by John Samples, “First, we must keep in mind the likely effects of direct popular election of the president. We would probably see elections dominated by the most populous regions of the country or by several large metropolitan areas. In the 2000 election, for example, Vice President Gore could have put together a plurality or majority in the Northeast, parts of the Midwest, and California. The victims in such elections would be those regions too sparsely populated to merit the attention of presidential candidates. Pure democrats would hardly regret that diminished status, but I wonder if a large and diverse nation should write off whole parts of its territory.” (Samples). While the smaller states would get a smaller say, it is not a bad thing. The less populated states should get less of a say. If the smaller states got more of a say than the votes from the people in those states would be worth more than the votes of the people in the larger
One reason the U.S. voting system is unfair is the Electoral College. The Electoral College Isn’t required to vote for the candidate that the majority of the people in that state voted for. According to David Walbert, from Learnnc.org “In November of a presidential election year, each state holds an election for president in which all eligible citizens …show more content…
citizens living in U.S. territories are underrepresented. This can be seen by the fact that citizens living in U.S. territories are not allowed to vote. According to an article by Hunter Schwarz on the Washington Post, dated March 9, 2015 “Residents of America 's island territories can 't vote because the Supreme Court found in a series of early 20th century decisions that they belonged to the United States but were "not a part" of the United States. The decisions also found the territories were inhabited by "alien races" who might not be able to understand Anglo-Saxon laws, so the U.S. Constitution didn 't have to apply.” (Schwarz). This means that the reason the U.S. still doesn’t allow citizens living in territories to vote is because of a decision that also said racist things about the people living in the territories. This is an outdated decision and the U.S. citizens who live in the U.S. territories should have a right to vote for their president. Also the U.S. territories have representatives in the house, but the representatives have non-voting seats. According to history.house.gov “five, non-voting Delegates represent the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. A non-voting Resident Commissioner, serving a four-year term, represents the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.” (“Determining …show more content…
were a complete democracy, the smaller states would get a smaller say. According to an article by John Samples, “First, we must keep in mind the likely effects of direct popular election of the president. We would probably see elections dominated by the most populous regions of the country or by several large metropolitan areas. In the 2000 election, for example, Vice President Gore could have put together a plurality or majority in the Northeast, parts of the Midwest, and California. The victims in such elections would be those regions too sparsely populated to merit the attention of presidential candidates. Pure democrats would hardly regret that diminished status, but I wonder if a large and diverse nation should write off whole parts of its territory.” (Samples). While the smaller states would get a smaller say, it is not a bad thing. The less populated states should get less of a say. If the smaller states got more of a say than the votes from the people in those states would be worth more than the votes of the people in the larger