Yet it is unclear how a direct election of the president could resolve such a deep national conflict without introducing a presidential run-off election -- a procedure which would add substantially to the time, cost, and effort already devoted to selecting a president and which might well deepen the political divisions while trying to resolve them. As James Madison explained, the electoral college wisely synthesized both of these important interests: As to the eventual voting by States, it has my approbation. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose… It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. The electoral votes are officially tabulated at the joint sessionof Congress and the winner of the election is officially declared. Yet this is less of a problem than it seems since, as a practical matter, the popular difference between the two candidates would likely be so small that either candidate could govern effectively. But not in the Electoral College system. In the controversial 2000 election, a majority of voters in 30 out of the 50 states voted for Bush.
Since every state has two senatorsand at least one representative to the House, every state has atleast 3 electoral votes. While all votes count in local and state elections, such votes would not really count on a national level. Although there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the past century. Your access to and use of the Service is conditioned on your acceptance of and compliance with these Terms. While this argument has a certain surface plausibility, it fails to account for the fact that presidential elections do not occur in a vacuum. But since 1992, there has been a shift, with citizens voting Democrat more than Republican in all but one presidential election. If the candidate and party in question had had enough energy and organization behind them to change the Constitution, they probably would have won the election in the first place.
Politicians would quickly realize that if they won the vote in the 10 most populous states or the 50 most populous cities, they could win the election. In other words, such a system forces political coalitions to occur within the political parties rather than within the government. Its abolition is the only path to a true American democracy. I truly believe that Bush got elected because of corruption in the voting academy. The Electoral College should be abolished because now we have cell phones, television, and in … formation can be attained with a click of a button, whether you're educated or not. There is at least one other way that future direct national elections could happen, even without a constitutional amendment. This election day, ask yourself: why is it that my vote probably doesn't mean shit? To assure a real majority winner, a much better solution than a simple plurality vote or keeping the electoral college would be to adopt instant runoff voting, a majority vote system.
But nothing could be farther from the truth. The election wasconducted under the new United States Constitution, wh … ich had beenratified earlier in 1788. Where would we find the trained lawyers, poll watchers and others needed to oversee a fair nationwide recount, and what would judicial supervision of a 50 state recount look like? The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, 1803-1805 Boston: Gales and Seaton, 1852 , p. Another consideration is the conditions under which the Electoral College has reversed the popular vote. And, like the Electoral College, it is only tolerated because it has been a custom for so long that most people have never even considered its implications. Last month, he predicted Trump might be ever.
Their argument is that, since each State is entitled to the same number of electoral votes regardless of its voter turnout, there is no incentive in the States to encourage voter participation. If a candidate wins the popular vote of a state by a just a single vote, he generally receives all the electoral votes of that state excluding Maine and Nebraska. Nor would a direct election have changed those outcomes without a run-off requiring over 50% of the popular vote an idea which not even proponents of a direct election seem to advocate. A third way of electing a minority president is if a third party or candidate, however small, drew enough votes from the top two that no one received over 50% of the national popular total. Why has the Electoral College not been abolished in the past 12 years? In addition, some detractors maintain that the electoral college is unfair because the candidate who wins the majority of a state's electoral votes is awarded all of its votes, with none being given to other candidates. Future direct national elections could happen, even without a constitutional amendment if the two major presidential candidates in 2020 themselves agreeing, solemnly and publicly long before Election Day, to abide by the national popular vote.
Another reason to abolish the outdated Electoral College is the fact that it's sheer design supports the two party system and gives third parties very little, if no chance at all of having a candidate nominated. The commerce clause has been defanged. Preventing Tyranny was a major goal of the constitution. Rob Richie October 29, 1999. Politicalparties often choose Electors that are state elected officials,state party leaders, or people in the state who have a personal orpolitical affiliation with their party's Presidentialcandidate.
But so, as an institution, does the United States Senate. It is a system in which we—the majority of us! A better suited candidate from a third party could exist but the design of the system allows for very little chance of succeeding. When there is a tie, the election is decided by the House of Representatives, … with each state delegation having one vote. Electors meet in their respective state capitals electors forthe District of Columbia meet within the District on the Mondayafter the second Wednesday in December, at which time they casttheir electoral votes on separate ballots for … president andvice-president. It means that the 684,000 citizens of North Dakota are awarded the same amount of political power as the 25,675,000 citizens of Texas. We have been using this system, in one way, shape, or form, for the past 200 years.
Yet, on the other hand, if a candidate wins California and its 54 electoral votes, then that candidate is one-fifth of the way to the 270 electoral votes needed to capture the presidency. Benjamin Rush, The Letters of Benjamin Rush, L. But in a direct election system, states with higher turnout would have more clout in the final tally, giving state governments incentives to encourage voting. We strongly advise you to read the terms and conditions and privacy policies of any third-party web sites or services that you visit. Top 10 Reasons It's Time to Abolish the Electoral College. The only reason for the lengthy postelection court battle in 2000 over how to count the votes in Florida was the Electoral College. Should that happen today, there are two possible resolutions: either one candidate could throw his electoral votes to the support of another before the meeting of the Electors or else, absent an absolute majority in the Electoral College, the U.
The Electoral College is constituted with this original philosophy of federalism, and a reminder of the intended limits on the federal government, in an era in which those limits are largely ignored. In 48 states the Electoral College is utilized in the same way Maine and Nebraska have a slight variation. It would require a change of the constitution to change the electoral college. Every four years in November over 90 million Americans vote for the presidential candidates, then in the middle of December the president and vice president of the United States are actually elected by the votes of only 538 citizens. The National Popular Vote bill has passed 30 state legislative chambers, in 20 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas 6 , Connecticut 7 , Delaware 3 , Maine 4 , Michigan 17 , Nevada 5 , New Mexico 5 , New York 31 , North Carolina 15 , and Oregon 7 , and both houses in California 55 , Colorado 9 , Hawaii 4 , Illinois 21 , New Jersey 15 , Maryland 10 , Massachusetts 12 , Rhode Island 4 , Vermont 3 , and Washington 11. If they err at all, it is on. Take a look at our latest presidential election, for instance.