Reasons Why We Should Keep the Electoral College

The Founding Fathers established the Electoral College. They didn’t want a president to be elected by popular vote or by a vote in Congress. The choice to accept this compromise arises from weighing several viewpoints. The future of the Electoral College was debated in the United States right after the elections in 2000 and 2016. In both the years, the candidate who had won through the voting system found himself to be unsuccessful in winning the Electoral College.

So, it was natural for it to become a matter that needed to be debated. The popular vote system, which would elect the presidential candidate with the most votes countrywide, is supported by Electoral College opponents. On the other side, the ones who support the Electoral College have their own set of points for its significance and call for it to continue.

It is fundamental to federalism

Defenders of the Electoral College believe it is a crucial aspect of the checks and balances that are fundamental to the federalism policy.

• Federalism distributes powers to federal, state, and local governments.
• States determine selection of the electors who vote for the president and the vice president.
• A state has the same number of electors as it does members in its congressional delegation.

Students at university studying subjects like political science will need to learn all about the Electoral College and how it functions. They also need to know this when studying various other subjects from history to economics.

A student may have difficulty doing research, going to classes, and studying for exams. When they find they don’t have time for reading books, writing assignments etc. they can make use of online essay examples. Any topic on politics has its own share of complex levels. So it is best for students to understand the use for argumentative essay on Electoral College and its related areas. This can give them inspiration and ideas that help them to create an outline for their own essays.

It represents the interests of the states

Defenders bring up reasons the Founding Fathers established the Electoral College system. Research shows that they wanted to check an impulse toward messy direct democracy. They established different institutions that could provide checks and balances for one another. It was their intention that the states and not the people would elect the president. They didn’t believe that the general public had the political awareness they needed to select the president.

Under the Constitution, officials elected by popular vote of the people are the governors of the state.  The Electoral College, therefore, represents the interests of states. The states act as filters or diffusers in national politics. After individuals cast their ballot for president, there is a tally of votes in the state. The winner gets all the electoral votes for the state.

It forces candidates to campaign nationally

When arguing why the Electoral College is good, defenders say it forces candidates to campaign nationally. Voters in different regions don’t have to worry that a candidate who only represents a small group of states will end up being president.  No candidate is able to win enough states in one region alone to become president.  The Electoral College therefore forces candidates to campaign in closely contested states across the whole country.

The Electoral College gives small states and racial minorities more leverage. Voters in small states would be ignored without the Electoral College. Racial minorities attract the attention of national candidates because they often live in large states with many electoral votes. Candidates must get votes from multiple states both large and small. This helps to ensure they will address the needs of the whole country and not just one segment.

The outcomes are decisive

One of the commonly given reasons to keep the Electoral College is the fear that a popular vote presidential election would cause chaos. A popular vote model often creates uncertainties, vote recounts, etc. With a popular vote system, individual issue parties could divide the presidential vote. Another thing that can be worked out here is that 20 candidates could run and the vote be divided equally. A president could be elected with the support of only a small % of the total population. A president will often win by a large majority of electoral votes.

A candidate must receive the vote of more than 50% of the electors. This means at least 270 to secure a win in the election. In case a candidate doesn’t receive the majority of votes, the House of Representatives votes. State voting blocs in the current system make ties rare. Electoral votes create a majority winner in each election. This spares the nation from having a period of uncertainty and constitutional chaos.

It promotes national unity

Giving voting power to the population is problematic in the United States. This is because individual states form smaller entities within the large federal structure. Each state has its own culture and personality. They all have their own policy priorities and contribute to the total elector count.

This means presidential candidates must campaign throughout the country and not just in large cities. They must cater to all citizens when campaigning.  They must continue to take a variety of perspectives into consideration when they are in office. This all helps to promote national unity instead of working against it.

It offers election security

Why should the Electoral College be kept? Based on the origins of the country, the Electoral College is seen as the most legitimate approach. Diffusing fraudulent voting across multiple states means they don’t have as much impact on the final outcome.

Concerted efforts to cheat may sway a national popular vote. It is much more difficult to sway election outcomes when so many different state elections take place across the country.  Without having the filter of electoral votes there could be more:

• lawsuits
• recounts
• questions about legitimacy
• uncertainty

A republic rather than a pure democracy

Critics of the Electoral College say that it doesn’t support democracy. In a manner, it removes the public's ability to choose the president. The argument that the United States is a constitutional republic rather than a democracy is used to support the Electoral College. It defends people's rights by defending the rights of states. Instead of a pure democracy, the Founding Fathers viewed the United States as a republic. They opposed giving any one group, including the people or the government, unrestricted authority.

After the chaos at the Capitol in 2021 the American people have become skeptical of the electoral processes. The Electoral Count Reform Act is a bill that would amend the Electoral Count Act of 1887. The shortcomings in the old act have complicated presidential elections. The new act has strong bipartisan support in Congress. The Senate is likely to wait until Congress reconvenes after the midterm elections to vote on the Act.

Conclusion

For the past 200 years or so, the Electoral College has functioned as the Founding Fathers had intended it to function. Their vision had helped them to create a system that works even in present-day America. Even at that time, they were quite surprised by how well it worked. However, this does not imply that changes won't be made in the future.  Even strong critics of the Electoral College can’t prove it doesn’t have any merits. It supports federalism, forces candidates to campaign nationally, and helps to ensure election security.  Outcomes are decisive and it helps to promote national unity.