Despite its imperfections, the Electoral College is still the best system for choosing a president in the United States. The principle of federalism is a major component of the U.S. Constitution, and it is supported through the Electoral College system. If one agrees that the states are just as important as the people who constitute the nation are in choosing a president, then the Electoral College is far from broken. U.S. Election history shows that for a presidential candidate to enter office, the candidate must win a majority of the states. For example, since 1900, only two presidential candidates have entered office without winning a majority of the states: John F. Kennedy in 1960 and Jimmy Carter in 1976.
That it takes a majority of the states to win a presidential election is a good thing. Though there have been elections where the president-elect failed to win over 50 percent of the popular vote, there has been only one election since the 1900s where the president-elect actually lost the popular vote---the 2000 presidential election. Moreover, given that presidential duties impact all 50 states---faithfully executing national laws, appointing federal officials, making treaties, to name a few---the president should represent the states as much as he does the people. An electoral system in which the president-elect could enter office having won a handful of states may invite instability, especially considering the possibility of a serious policy dispute between the handful of states who favored the president in the election and those otherwise. As a final point, it is worth noting that the method the founding fathers adopted for choosing the president, according to Hamilton, was less controversial in relation to the other achieved compromises. As Hamilton asserts, “[The Electoral College]…is almost the only part of [the Constitution]…which has escaped without severe [criticism].”
Despite its imperfections, the Electoral College is still the best system for choosing a president in the United States. The principle of federalism is a major component of the U.S. Constitution, and it is supported through the Electoral College system. If one agrees that the states are just as important as the people who constitute the nation are in choosing a president, then the Electoral College is far from broken. U.S. Election history shows that for a presidential candidate to enter office, the candidate must win a majority of the states. For example, since 1900, only two presidential candidates have entered office without winning a majority of the states: John F. Kennedy in 1960 and Jimmy Carter in 1976.
ReplyDeleteThat it takes a majority of the states to win a presidential election is a good thing. Though there have been elections where the president-elect failed to win over 50 percent of the popular vote, there has been only one election since the 1900s where the president-elect actually lost the popular vote---the 2000 presidential election. Moreover, given that presidential duties impact all 50 states---faithfully executing national laws, appointing federal officials, making treaties, to name a few---the president should represent the states as much as he does the people. An electoral system in which the president-elect could enter office having won a handful of states may invite instability, especially considering the possibility of a serious policy dispute between the handful of states who favored the president in the election and those otherwise. As a final point, it is worth noting that the method the founding fathers adopted for choosing the president, according to Hamilton, was less controversial in relation to the other achieved compromises. As Hamilton asserts, “[The Electoral College]…is almost the only part of [the Constitution]…which has escaped without severe [criticism].”