Sue Inman
Should we abolish the electoral college for the election of the president of the United States of America? The question we must ask ourselves is whether or not this process has out lived its usefulness. In 1804 when the present electoral college system was established, its purpose was to choose a president in the safest and most efficient way. Our forefathers wanted the people to make the decision and not congress, but at the same time they were not comfortable with the idea of the people actually electing the President. The compromise for this situation was the establishment of the electoral college. The people from each state elect the person who will vote for them. When the two parties appeared this system began to have some problems. Each state has as many electorates as it has representatives in Congress and the Senate. As the years have passed the electoral college has become a mere formality, because each Elector has made an implied pledge to vote for their party's nominees, instead of the candidate they personally think is best qualified. This implied pledge has seldom been broken.
When we think of abolishing the electoral college we have to think of some possible consequences, it might encourage the formation of a third or fourth party, and this could lead to the election of a president without a clear majority. In the history of the electoral college 4 presidents have been elected, even though their closest opponent received more popular votes, John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayse in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888 and William Clinton in 1992.
Let's look a little closer. What is wrong with the establishment of a third or fourth party? We are a country built on the idea of political freedom, the right to think what we want, to say what we feel and to vote the way we chose. Why should we maintain a system that restricts these freedoms? If the electoral college is dissolved we could really vote for the President of the United States. The parties would no longer have control over who is nominated. Someone like Perot would truly have a chance of being elected President! In the present system even if a third party candidate receives the majority of the popular vote there is little probability he would be nominated. The electoral college would follow party lines and vote for the candidate from the major party that had the highest number of votes in each state. Presently there are 538 electoral votes, to be elected the candidate must have the highest number of these votes, at least 269 in a two party election. When we add a third party the candidate only needs 180 total votes. For example, if Perot had won the popular vote in smaller states, but not the big states of California (with 45 votes), Florida (17), Illinois (26), New Jersey (17), New York (41), Ohio (25), Pennsylvania (27), Texas (26), Michigan (21) for a total of 245 votes and all the states voted the same way, he could not be elected. Traditionally these states do not all vote the same way, which is why the candidates concentrate on these states. In most elections it is easy to tell when the candidates are sure of how the major states will vote because only then do they concentrate some of their time on the smaller states.
If the president were elected by popular vote each registered voter's vote would carry equal weight no matter where they lived in the country. Direct vote would be good for those of us who feel we need to have a say in who runs our country. The stratagem for campaigns would be different. There would be more emphasis on the smaller states to ensure their votes, but there would also be more smear campaigns as seen on the local level in a effort to persuade popular opinion. Most people do not take the time to pay attention to all the promises the candidates make. They only listen to what the media tells them. Candidates that look good on television are preferred over someone who may not be attractive, but is better qualified.
The question of whether or not to disband the electoral college is not really the question, but the need for reform of the electoral college is. My proposal is for the election of the president to be decided by who wins the majority in each state regardless of which political party is in control of that state. The winner should be the best man for the job, not the man who has the right connections. Mistakes in judgment will be made whether by popular ballot or electoral ballot, I would prefer to have a say so in my mistakes instead of someone else making them for me.