2016 was the second time in three first term election cycles in this millennium that the loser of the election won the popular vote. Actually, the popular vote winner has lost three more times during the 1800s for other strenuous circumstances. In our nation's two hundred plus year history, there have been 700 proposed constitutional amendments to change the electoral college. This goes all to say that there is significant anger for both sides, but especially for Democrats, about whether the Electoral College system should be changed or abolished completely.
The premise for there to have the Electoral College is simple: to give true voting power to those not in metropolitan areas. In a state like Wyoming, a population of less than 600,000, gives three electoral votes. This means that each individual vote in that state is worth proportionally more than a vote in California. This allows people in smaller states to have a say in national politics, even through all the costal partisanship in this country.
Yet, there exists another clear reason for why the Electoral College should be abandoned: everyone should have a vote that counts equally. When our voting system was established, it was created because so much of the population was illiterate and did not have the knowledge necessary to vote accurately. That's why we have electors that vote for presidents and we vote for the electors. Today, the internet has leveled the playing field, giving people access to information in new and more widespread ways. Removing the electoral college would grant every single citizen with that right that initially had only been restricted to white, straight, protestant, property-owning men.
So this dilemma occurs. Do we as a nation value the vote of the individual citizen over the groups of people who are not represented as much overall in society? If the answer is that we as a nation agree that every vote should matter equally, the next step would be to add an amendment to the Constitution. This begs us to ask another question that is very crucial: would a party in control want this to happen if that meant they could lose an election in the future. This is the same dilemma that occurred with Roosevelt appointing more Supreme Court justices arose. Is it truly necessary and worth it to add amendments that could potentially backfire just as bad?
Every other major world power already has some form of direct vote for their presidents/prime ministers. For a nation that has praised itself for being truly progressive, the very system we elect our leader is the furthest thing from progressive. Much of the reason for why the electoral college was established was to ensure that the most informed people possible are voting. But now, with the majority of citizens having the capability to be able to get information, then the policies we have to vote our president now should reflect that same philosophy as it did when we began this nation.
Sources:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-people-hate-the-electoral-college-but-its-not-going-away-soon/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/the-electoral-college-was-meant-to-stop-men-like-trump-from-being-president/508310/
Very interesting post! I agree with your opinion on the Electoral College. The system is highly outdated and unnecessary, but some people may say otherwise. USA Today argues that a popular vote would gravitate towards big cities and ignore the smaller towns. The current system allows people in less populated areas to have a voice. This argument somewhat makes sense, but it's something I would still disagree with. The topic of the Electoral College is certainly controversial in modern politics.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/11/10/electoral-college-popular-vote-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-editorials-debates/93609562/
Noah, I like the way you laid out the information and I do agree that this issue needs to be addressed as there are clearly flaws in the system. Unfortunately, I do not agree with your belief that the internet has leveled the playing field. While people definitely have access to the necessary information, the web has a tendency to make people more misinformed than informed. This is what the Electoral College was designed for, to prevent misinformed and uneducated people from electing an unqualified person. Sadly, the Electoral College failed to do exactly what it was designed to do.
ReplyDelete