Pros And Cons Of The Electoral College System

Why the Electoral College should not be preserved? The Constitutional Convention of 1787 gave birth to the system of the Electoral College. Electoral College system can be described as a system in which voters vote for electors on election day, who then cast their vote for candidate in their respective party. Our Founding Fathers described this system in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution. According to the Constitution, electors per state are equal to the number of seats each state holds in the Congress, which include the Senate and the House of Representative delegations. California holds the most Electoral which are 54 electors. However, with every census the numbers of each state electoral change due to the process called reapportionment.
One advantage of the Electoral System is that it favors states with smaller populations. Without the Electoral system smaller states would be ignored in presidential elections. But because of this system the voice of the smaller states and minority groups like farmers are being preserved. With the State of the Union Address the President sets the agenda for the Congress and the legislations, similarity the Electoral College sets the agenda for how a presidential candidates campaign must be arranged. Candidates tend to campaign more in states that are swing states, and this is an advantage for voters who are dubious. Undecided voters in swing states can use this as an opportunity to educate themselves on the various policies each candidate stand for. The Electoral College system helps promote a two party system which is beneficial to our nation. Due to the winner take all rule, third and fourth parties help deny a plurality to a candidate, but third parties do not have the hope of winning large numbers of electoral college votes. This system discourages third parties from running and promotes “a stable balance by accommodating varied interests and opinions.” A two party system not only reduces political dissension but also increases a country’s harmony but increasing compromise and consensus between the two parties. Another advantage of the Electoral College is that it gives states the absolute power to participate
Critics argue that this system listens to the minority. In fact, it does not, this system discourages minority by using the winner take all rule. The winner take all rule promotes the idea that 49.9% of voters might get no representation. The Electoral should be changed to a proportional representation system, a method of voting by which political parties are given legislative representation in proportion to their popular vote. For example, in a state with 21 electors and 47% votes for Republicans and 53% for Democrats should get electors proportional to the popular vote, which would be 11 electors for Democrats and 9 for Republicans. This system would be much fair and would help represent both the minority and the majority of a certain state. Proportional elector system will not only encourage voter turnout, but also help accurately reflect the views of the public. Another reason why the Electoral College should be changed is because there is a theoretical possibility that a president loses the popular vote but still wins the electoral votes. As history shows, in the election of 1888 between Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison won the election with plurality of the Electoral Vote (Harrison - 233 Electoral votes, Cleveland – 168 Electoral Votes),