The electoral college has been an important part of our election system for over two hundred years. This is a call to fix an antique system, that is holding us back from social progression. We must eliminate the electoral college, and further prepare our society for all challenges ahead. The electoral college is far broken than repair, and by replacing it we’ll achieve the benefits of direct popular vote.
By abolishing the electoral college, we would be improving our democracy.
In the electoral college there is a discrepancy in equality this creates negative effects on the participation of citizens voting. According to Representative Roberts, Daniel from the University of Tennessee, “To begin with, the Electoral College should be put to rest. Perhaps the institution served its purpose initially, but it has now become a relic. Instead of relying on electors, the United States should adopt a national popular vote, where the candidate with most votes actually wins. In this way each person has the incentive to go out and vote for the candidate of their choice for example, no longer would democrats in Tennessee feel like staying home on Election Day because of the feeling that they can’t make a difference. In any case, abolishing the electoral college would at least make every voter feel as if his or her vote counted.” Another study by Damon M, From the University of Georgia, “However, if the number of visits and GRPs observed across all states in 2004 were allocated so that each state has an equal number of visits and equal media saturation, the average predicted state turnout is .618 an average increase of 3.1% in voter turnout.” This is crucial to a democracy because the greater majority of citizens participating create the favored decision, if we use the previous statistic we see that more than half of the people would actually be voting on what matters vs. less than half presented by the Electoral College, thus leaving direct popular vote the better option for a stronger democracy.
By eliminating the electoral college, direct popular vote will eliminate the two party system.
The two party system in America, fitted its needs for the majority of our history, but in modern day society we see that we need to break free from that system. According to USA Today, “Domestic politics affects trade decisions in every administration, Eizenstat from the European-American Business Council says, “‘The very closeness of the election sent a chill down the spine of the administration and convinced them that they needed early on to shore up their political support, “‘ he says. “‘But it comes at a cost and in this case really a cost of U.S. leadership on free trade.” The importance of this evidence is the fact that it provides an example of how politics affect the actual benefits of a decision to get re-elected, an example that can be linked back to the two party system which allows for this to happen. The essence of competition to do what the other side is doing better or do what the other side can’t, as shown in the U.S leadership on free trade example. Another example given by U.S.A today exemplifies the negative issues created through the two party system specifically polarization, “When California suffered rolling blackouts in an energy crisis last year, the Bush administration rejected calls to intervene. In February, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announced it was moving hundreds of jobs from Southern California to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Over California’s protests, the administration last year ordered the state to add ethanol to its gasoline to reduce air pollution — a step that would be expensive for California’s drivers, but good for Iowa’s corn growers.” These all are providing the example of how the two party system is creating polarization where they will do more negatives to states that already are sealed on the other side of the political race to benefit them on the swing states to gain those votes.
This is distorting policies and politics which go against the framers intent, whereas direct popular vote wipes out the variables that create the two party system. According to the Committee on the Judiciary, “Under direct election, most of the incentives toward moderate, broadly based, two-party competition are removed. It is true that a sizable popular plurality 40% would be required for victory. But that, without more is insufficient to sustain two party competition of the kind we have known. Under direct election, it is not the distribution of the vote which matters, but only the size. Votes would be sought without regard to the states which happened to contain them. Interest groups would face no necessity to moderate their views or to compromise with other groups within their resident states. Candidates, in turn, would face no necessity to present a broadly based platform within each state.” This piece of evidence is reciting the fact that competition in states would not exist, therefore leaving the individual groups less of a need to run under a political party to gain any power in government, but leave them to run as their own person. When there is not the competition for presidency that limits it to two parties you see multiple other parties being introduced into the presidential race, without creating polarization because no matter what every single vote in each state counts.
For all the aforementioned points the electoral college needs to be abolished, and we need to look at the solution. The solution, stands clear, as an improvement for our country. Direct popular vote, ultimately, will reinforce democracy.