Electoral College System Essay

The President and the delinquency President of the United States ar choose indirectly by an institution known as the electoral College. The U. S. Constitution provides the broad framework through which electors are appointed and by which they cast votes for the President and Vice President. In evaluating the contingent upon(p) election process, near commentators have suggested that any threshold inquiry requires assessing how often contingent election occurs. If the results of a general election are condescendly inconclusive, they increase the likelihood of contingent election.The democratic criteria require implementing reforms that bring the people into the contingency process. Critics of the electoral College governing body argue that the presence of viable and well-funded third- society or independent presidential campaigners, who may be able to garner electoral votes by carrying a plurality of the votes in severalisewide elections, increases the likelihood of contingen t election. psychoanalysis of criticism of the Electoral College system There are several shortcomings of the Electoral College as cited by the proponents of the presidential election reform.These shortcomings have raised justifications for reform or abolition of the current system. One of the criticism is on the Electoral College is the Electoral College deadlock of the contingent election. In this one, the 12th amendment provide that the House of Representatives should choose a president and the senate chooses the vice president by contingent election if the presidential and the vice presidential candidates votes have not reached a simple volume of the Electoral College votes.The election of the president by the House of Representatives happened only once on the February 9th, 1825 where John Quincy Adams was elected as President over Andrew Jackson. This election was criticized by some commentators saying that it brought about a geological formational crisis since the president was selected as part of a political corrupt bargain because some of the presidential candidates were disqualified from the contingent election. Critics claim that this election removes the choice of president and vice president voters (Whitaker & Neale, 2004).Another criticism is on the minority president which was expressed in the Electoral College misfire. In this one, the current electoral college system can result in the election of a minority president which states that the president can be one who wins the major(ip)ity of the electoral votes even though he has lost the popular votes. This was experienced in the 1800s where three minority presidents namely, John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, and benzoin Harrison in1888.The other criticisms are on the current methods of allocating electoral votes, the decennial census problem, and the faithless elector, presidential succession between nomination and inauguration, independent and the third party versus majo r party candidates. These criticisms have caused so many controversies that have made many people believe that the current Electoral College system is not a unspoilt system and therefore it needs amendment (Whitaker & Neale, 2004). Advantages of various reform proposals.The electoral college reform proposals include (1)the district plan, awarding each state two at greathearted electoral votes to the state-wide popular vote winners, and one electoral vote to the winning candidate in each congressional district (2) the proportional plan, awarding electoral votes in states in direct proportion to the popular vote gained in the state by each candidate and (3) the automatic plan, awarding each states electoral votes directly on a winner-take- all basis to the statewide vote winners (Amar, 1995).The advantages to the electoral-vote system include its tendency to produce a give the sack winner. The constitution is however subject to change, allowing for the second vote in case of depres sed voter turnout. Great leverage is also given to third party candidates by requiring the winner to have a majority and by this it calls for fair and just elections. A National Election Agency is incorporated in the system to run the vote. However, the government also comes in to help, where the National Election Agency has fewer powers under the government (Amar, 1995).Despite the fact that the president alone is elected by the people, doesnt mean he can permitly defy the law. It is good to know that the elections are fair in that a presidential candidate who stands in his campaign and wins with a substantial majority of votes from the American people does of course gain the mandate. The candidate who emerges with the most electoral votes has a fully legitimate claim to the office for the next four years (Amar, 1995). Disadvantages of various reform proposals. In the U. S there is a rule that, a candidate elect on the Election Day may not be the president.Therefore if it happen s that a candidate has failed to win the national popular vote, he might be sworn in as the president by the virtue of claiming more electoral votes on than his opponents. Therefore the master(prenominal) disadvantage of such kind of proposal, is that if the academic term president who lost in the popular vote is returned again to power after his rejection, then there will be a wide chiding on the Electoral college as a wacky anachronism which will lead to extensive demands for the amendments of the constitution in order for the replacement of the electoral vote with popular election (Longley, 2008).Due to this kind of proposals, there is a possibility of not telling the exact winner since the constitution is the main source of authenticity. The main disadvantage here is that there might be a possibility of both candidates having different fundamental campaigns which give different issues of emphasis and making frequent appearances in different states. Another disadvantage for th is proposal is the argument on which candidate to take office and who was chosen by an archaic and wholly ill-judged system.If the electoral system is replaced, by the popular vote election, since it is not irrational there is a possibility of embarrassment on the president opting to be chosen by this process (Dellinger, 2004). Another greatest disadvantage of the present system of voting in U. S is that there is a possibility that the candidate who receives the most votes from the nation (people) may not take office. Therefore the present president in office may face many challenges and offsetting values since he or she was not put in by the majority.The disadvantage of the constitutional system for choosing a president in the U. S is not perfect and needs to be changed and therefore the candidate who emerges with most electoral votes has full justified claim to the office for four years (Dellinger, 2004). Conclusion It is clear that once the candidate chosen by the people of the United States on the Election Day may not become president. The candidate must choose the constitutional rules currently in place.In the voting parties, the party that receives more total votes nationally wins the parliament while the one with fewer total votes chooses the Nations prime minister. The constitution however, is subject to change (Longley & Dana, 1992). Amending the Constitution to alter it would present a series of difficult questions Will we give great leverage to third party candidates by requiring the winner to have a majority? Will we have a runoff, which might lead to depressed turnout for the second vote? Will we pee-pee a National Election Agency to run the vote and or leave it with the 51 governments who now run it?If those states report raw votes, will they in some manner artificially increase the number of voters in the state or pad the totalsa temptation now avoided by having a set number of electoral votes for each state? These are not insurmountable obje ctions to constitutional change, but they should certainly give pause (Longley & Dana, 1992).ReferencesAmar, A. R. (1995). Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Death Closing the Constitutions Succession Gap Dellinger, W. (2004). Popularity contest in defense of the Electoral College, Washington Post.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC. Retrieved October 26th, 2008, from http//www. slate. com/id/2108991/ Longley R. (2008). The Electoral College System, who really elects the president of the united states, About . com Longley, L. D. & Dana, J. D. , Jr. (1992). The Biases of the Electoral College in the 1990s Whitaker, L. P. & Neale, T. H. (2004, November 5). The Electoral College An Overview and Analysis of Reform Proposals. CRS Report for Congress. Retrieved October 26th, 2008, from http//italy. usembassy. gov/pdf/other/RL30804. pdf.