Research Paper
Research Paper
Research Paper
Abstract
It has been long debated that the winner-take-all-principle of the Electoral College should be abolished
for reasons that it fails to promote loyalty, equality and democracy. Some of the arguments against the
Electoral College are: it has the risk of so-called faithless electors and the possible role of the Electoral
College in depressing voter turnout. On the other hand, arguments in favor of this principle defend that it:
enhances the status of minority interests and maintains a federal system of government and
representation.
This Research paper will use the following sources: Keeping the Republic by Barbour and Wright,
Federalist No. 68 by Alexander Hamilton, the documents written by William Kimberling and Tara Ross
and the National Archives and Records Administration to address whether or not to abolish the winnertake-all principle. This paper also intends to: tell how the-winner-take-all-principle works in the Electoral
College, identify some of the arguments of for and against the winner-take-all-principle, and explain some
the proposals and steps that have been made to change the winner take all principle.
In conclusion, despite the proposals that have been made to change the winner-take-all-principle of the
Electoral College and the measures that have been done, it is still improbable to change the system.
president and the vice president in November. This process is called the Electoral College. According to
authors Christine Barbour and Gerald Wright (2015), because the founders of the Constitution feared that
the electoral might have too much power, they established the Electoral College (p. 414).
The Electoral College consists of 538 electorates, 270 of which are needed to win the presidency.
The Constitution provides for each state to have as many electoral votes as it does senators and
representatives in Congress (Barbour & Wright, 2015, p. 414). Also, under the Twenty-third Amendment
of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is given 3 electoral votes treated like a state. In December,
the electors will meet in their respective state capitals and cast their votes for the president and vice
president. The results then are sent to the Congress and the Senate counts the votes as the new session
opens. According to Barbour and Wright, if no candidate achieves a majority in the Electoral College,
the Constitution calls for the House of Representatives to choose from the top electoral vote winners. In
this process, each state has one vote. If the vote goes to the House, then the Senate decides on the vice
president, with each senator having one vote (Barbour & Wright, 2015, p. 414).
The Electoral College holds a principle known as the winner-take-all principle that is used in
most states and in the District of Columbia except in Maine and Nebraska. Barbour and Wright give an
example where, the winner in California, even if he or she has less than half of the popular vote, wins all
the states fifty-five electoral votes. Similarly, the loser in California may have won 49 percent of the
popular vote but gets nothing in the Electoral College (Barbour & Wright, 2015, p. 414). This principle
means that in a state, the candidate who has the majority or the plurality of the popular vote gets all the
electoral votes of the state. This principle, then, does not guarantee that whoever wins the nationwide
popular vote, is sure to be elected as the president since, the Electoral College determines the winner of
the election. The situation wherein the popular vote winner lost in the Electoral College has only
happened three times in the history of America (Barbour & Wright, 2015, p. 414).
Electoral College also gives the presidency as an institution, the shift to be more sensitive and concerned
when it comes to minority groups and special interest groups.
Second, the winner-take-all principle maintains a federal system of government and
representation that has been proved to work excellently, because in the first place, the Electoral College
was designed to represent each State's choice for the presidency, having each states number of electoral
votes the same as the number of its representatives and senators as the House of Representatives was
designed to represent the States according to was the size of the each states population and the Senate
was designed to represent each state equally. To abolish the Electoral College in favor of a nationwide
popular election for president would strike at the very heart of the federal structure laid out in our
Constitution and would lead to the nationalization of our central government -- to the detriment of the
States (Kimberling, 1992).
Second, according to Ross, under the Proportional Plan, the Electoral College would be retained,
but the electoral votes in each state would be allocated based upon the percentage of the popular vote won
(2004). So, rather than basing the number of the electoral votes in each state according to its number of
representatives and senators, the electoral votes would be based on the percentage of the popular vote
won. Although the proponents of this plan argue that it retains the Electoral College vigor, the results
would be closer to the national popular vote outcome (Ross, 2004). They also argue that, the voices of
minority voting groups would be reflected in the final election tally because even ballots cast for thirdparty candidates could be reflected in the national results (Ross, 2004). Thus, it is also likely to happen
that a presidential candidate can win the election without winning the popular, but Ross claims that, it will
happen less likely than the system that we have at present (2004).
Ross states that, Colorado is currently considering adoption of the Proportional Plan. She
discusses that, there is an organization of Colorado citizens financed by a group from San Francisco and
funded by a Brazilian millionaire who resides part-time in California, where they collected enough
signatures to place a referendum on its November 2004 ballot. If passed, this referendum would
supposedly replace Colorado's winner-take-all system of casting electoral votes with a system of
proportional allocation, making Colorado the only state to enact such a method in presidential elections
(2004).
Conclusion
Despite the criticisms where some are mentioned in this paper, the winner-take all principle
would be hard to abolish or even change it because, it was included in the original Constitution and it has
performed its functions for over 200 years. One of its functions is to safeguard that the president of the
United States has both the popular support to administrate, wherein this popular support gives the
president the likeliness of performing his/her job effectively. Proposals that have been made to abolish the
Electoral College have failed because they are more likely to create more problems than the Electoral
College alone. Lastly, if the winner-take-all principle of the Electoral College would be abolished, this
change would thwart one of the main pillars of our political system that is the division of the national and
federal governments that guarantees a firm and solid national government.
As Alexander Hamilton, one of the founding fathers of the Constitution, writes in the Federalist
No. 68, the mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of
the system which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents. The most
plausible of these has even deigned to admit that the election of the President is pretty well guarded. I
venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm, that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least
excellent. It unites in an eminent degree all the advantages, the union of which was to be wished for
(1788).
References
Barbour, C. and Wright G.. (2015). Keeping the republic: Power and Citizenship in
American Politics (6th edition brief). Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press.
Hamilton, A. (1788). The Federalist papers. Retrieved from: https://www.congress.gov/
Kimberling, W. (1992). The Electoral College. Retrieved from: https://uselectionatlas.org
National Archives and Records Administration. (n.d.) U. S. Electoral College: Who are the
electors? How do they vote?. Retrieved from: https://www.archives.gov/
Ross, T. (2004). The Electoral College: Enlightened democracy. Retrieved from:
http://www.heritage.org/