In order for a candidate to win the presidency in the United States, they must win the majority of votes within the electoral college. Each state is given a set number of votes in the electoral college based on the size of its congressional delegation, and the number of U.S. Senators. Some argue that we should abolish the electoral college and replace it with the winner being determined by the popular vote. Others argue this might lead to a tyranny of the majority. In contrast, others may respond that the electoral college itself is undemocratic and disenfranchises voters based upon what state they live in. No other country uses an electoral college to mediate the popular vote and determine the actual winner.

Take a position: Should we preserve the electoral college, abolish it, or reform it in some type of way? Why or Why not? If you do propose a reform, specify why and how you believe this reform would be efficient and fair.

Within your answer, you might think about the consequences of preserving/abolishing/ or reforming the electoral college might have. Consider the Great Compromise and the politics at of our countries founding, is this still relevant today? What would abolishing or reform mean for the way political campaigns operate? What effects would this have on large states? Small States? What about voters who live in a state where one party tends to dominate? Remember there is no “right” or “wrong” answer here, but your comments and responses to your colleagues should be justified with evidence and reasoning. We did skip over the “campaigns and elections” chapter (chapter 10) so there is some relevant information there that you can pull from, as well as from Chapter 13 and our lecture materials.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Position Reform the Electoral College While the Electoral College system has its flaws abolishing it entirely may not be the most effective solution I... View the full answer