Should the Electoral College System Be Abolished

The current electoral college system mandated to elect the president approach in the United States has been one of the most debated discussions in American history. This presidential election approach, which was brought up by the Founding Fathers to act as an equality bridge between direct elections of the president and Congressional choice of the president, has elicited applause and immense criticism over time (Edwards III, 2023). However, this debate escalated after the 2016 elections, where Clinton had more votes in the general population but did not become president because the presidency was based on the electoral votes that Trump won. Such outcomes have further intensified the ongoing debate on whether this system actually portrays the actual will of the people or dilutes the democratic tenet of one man, one vote. While the Electoral College possesses specific flaws that need to be addressed, this paper argues that this system is still one of the essential features of democracy in the United States because it allows for the equal representation of all states, provides political stability, and motivates candidates to draft campaigns that include and safeguard the interests of all states.

Supporting Arguments

Fair Representation for All States

The Electoral College system has been of greater significance as it has provided equal representation of all the states in the presidential elections. Notably, this system ensures that states with large populations do not overpower and determine the fate of other states with fewer populations when it comes to electing the president. As observed by Codrington, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact can weaken the power of small states such as Nevada in the determination of presidential elections since the state's electors may be compelled to vote as per the national popular vote rather than the choice of the majority of the people of Nevada (Codrington, 2020). This observation highlights the significance of the Electoral College as a system of safeguarding the rights of the less-populated states. If the Electoral College were not the primary means of choosing the president, presidential candidates would have been focusing on campaigning and safeguarding the interests of states with higher populations to get enough votes to gain the presidency. However, this possibility of segregation was seen by the Founding Fathers and was mitigated by the Electoral College system. Therefore, this election approach helps ensure that all states, especially the less populated ones, get a fair chance in the electoral process.

Promoting Political Stability

The Electoral College system strengthens national political stability after elections because power shifts cannot be decided based on slight margins, as evident in the popular vote election approach. This has been witnessed in past elections, for instance, in 2000, Bush and Gore, and in 2016, Trump and Clinton, where the candidate who won with slight margins in the general elections did not emerge as the president because of losing in the Electoral College system (Feerick, 2021). If these slight margins were to determine presidents in the case of a popular vote approach, there are higher chances that political instability would have emerged because minor changes in the voting patterns can bring about massive shifts in the power structure among the politicians. However, the Electoral College system requires that the candidates gain most of the electoral votes and motivates them to adopt moderate policies that favor the nation at large. It requires candidates to seek support from various areas and populations, encouraging healthy discussion and cooperation. This system protects federalism by allowing each state an equal say, protects the minority from the rule of the masses, and sustains policy stability by minimizing policy flip-flopping. While critics say it leads to results that may not reflect the national popular vote, proponents say it best fosters a more stable political climate that is driven by consensus.

Encouraging Broad Coalitions

In addition, the Electoral College system encourages presidential candidates to get support from a wide number of people across different states and regions. The electoral college makes the candidates rally for nationwide support by denying them the ability to appeal to specific regions, hence safeguarding the principles of federalism (Muller, 2020). However, in a direct popular vote system, candidates may focus their campaigns on densely populated cities so that they can secure a large number of votes, helping them win the presidency by rolling through major cities while completely ignoring rural areas and smaller states. However, as noted by Feerick, the Electoral College alters the dynamics, ensuring that every state is guaranteed at least three votes in the Electoral College, irrespective of its population (Feerick, 2021). Therefore, the candidates need to come up with messages and policies appealing to a wider population. This helps to foster unity within the country and ensures that candidates do not ignore certain areas or groups in the country.

Counterargument and Refutation

Undemocratic Nature

The opponents of the Electoral College state that this system is not democratic, as a candidate can become the president without receiving the majority of votes. This has happened five times in the history of the United States, with the last time being the 2016 presidential elections, where, despite Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote by more than 2 million votes, Donald Trump was later sworn in as the president after winning the electoral college (Feerick, 2021). This outcome sparked outrage, with many people feeling that the people's will was not represented in the election, demanding a change. Opponents have persistently argued that in a real democracy, as evident in other major elections in the U.S., the candidate with the highest number of votes is declared the winner (Edwards III, 2023). Hence, the presidential elections should adhere to the same approach. Even though the critics have valid points about the Electoral College, they fail to recognize that the system was purposefully created as a compromise to determine the presidential winner based on a broad representation of the population, not just the densely populated regions. Therefore, this argument does not qualify the criterion of abolishing this system, which safeguards most tenets of the United States democracy.

In a nutshell, despite the weaknesses of the Electoral College system that have been widely criticized, this system is a vital element of the American political system that helps to protect against tyranny and ensure equal representation at the national level. Through maintaining political stability, ensuring the participation of numerous groups of voters, and avoiding the exclusion of the states with smaller populations, this presidential election approach safeguards the principles of federalism and the balance of power between the states and the central power. However, even though there are significant changes that should be made to this system, eliminating it can have detrimental effects on the American democratic system. Therefore, this essay invites all Americans to embrace and think of ways of enhancing the Electoral College, but not to abolish it, as it remains a symbol of equity and provides a national outlook of the diverse states with diverse views and interests that form the United States.

Offload drafts to field expert

Our writers can refine your work for better clarity, flow, and higher originality in 3+ hours.

Match with writer

350+ subject experts ready to take on your order

Mark R.★ 5.0

6+ yrs experienceEssays & research papers