The issue of U.S. presidential election has dominated debates on the best and most suitable way to undertake the most important election in the country with the Electoral College being the most polarizing issue. The electoral congress is the main determinant of the election results with the first candidate attaining 270 votes being crowned the presidency even in the occasion that the candidate has lost the majority vote (Gregg, 2011). In the occasion that the candidate does not win the National Popular Vote (NPV), the opponents have claimed that the electoral vote limits democracy as the candidate winning the election do not portray the wishes of the people.
In the last four elections, the winner of the election has been as a result of winning the electoral congress vote at the expense of the NPV which has caused an increment of calls to change the constitution to ensure that NPV is the determinant of any election (Underhill, 2012). Some of the proposed changes to the system whereby the electors from each state would be required to vote for the candidate who wins the most votes nationwide. The proposed changes to the system preserve the Electoral College and do not require constitutional changes since the constitution has entitled states to have exclusive power to award their electoral votes (Underhill, 2012).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The proposed changes whereby the electors would elect the candidate with the highest vote in their states to ensure their vote represent the views of their people rather than the current system that electors are independent to vote for the candidate according to electoral districts. This move would enable the candidates to campaign nationwide rather than set targets of the major electoral strongholds. The opponents of changes claim that the move would not be successful as the candidates would only target areas with the highest population, for instance, they would campaign in cities.
The recount of votes in 2000 in Florida were ugly because the Electoral College were concentrated in one state. These issues would be evident under NPV where two candidates would be separated by few hundred votes thus turning the country into havoc (Gregg, 2011). The different times the issue has been proposed it has had both strong proponents and strong opponents with the proponents of changing the system focusing on the democracy issue whereas the opponents have shared their concern on the issue of ensuring the best candidate wins rather than winners of NPV as the winners would be as a result of disrespect and violation of federalism and dignity of small states (Gregg, 2011).
I believe that both the current and proposed systems have their pros and cons but I believe that preserving the electoral vote is essential to maintain the nation as a republic and ensure limited havoc as have been evident in most democratic countries where elections have led to war. Although I support preserving the electoral vote, I believe the system requires major changes like the proposed change where 132 States have united to ensure that the electoral vote of each state is awarded to the candidate with the highest NPV in the state. I believe that the candidates will be bound to campaign in all areas rather than target some with the highest vote count. The system will reduce the cons of both the Electoral College current system and the proposed NPV thus stabilize the presidential election.
References
Gregg, G. L. (2011). Unpopular vote: Enemies of the Electoral College aim to scrap the Founders’ design. The American Conservative.
Underhill, W. (2012). Changing up the electoral college? State Legislatures. The Free Library . Retrieved December 14, 2016, from, https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Changing+up+the+electoral+college%3F-a0276999610
