Comment on ONE topic from the list below:
1) Should the United States abolish the electoral college? Why or why not?
2) What do you think about direct democracy versus representative democracy? Should states place more public policy issues on the ballot and let the people directly vote on the "issues of the day" or do you favor representative democracy where legislators make policy decisions? In truth, we have a mixture of the two, but would you prefer to see more direct democracy or less direct democracy? What are the pros and cons of each?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
With regards to the Electoral College many Americans feel that their vote does not count. Americans, who vote with the majority in a popular vote only to have the “election reversed” by the Electoral College the election appears to have been stolen, feel they have good reason to be indignant. The reasons for most of the consternation on the part of the American people are that they do not understand the process and the reasons for the checks and balances. The Electoral College was instituted to instill yet another device of governmental checks and balances. It was formed because it was feared that an all out popular vote would make the office of the presidency too powerful, giving a president too much authority. Popular vote still in force and used to decide local issues and elect other federal, state, and local offices. 1824 was the first time that the Electoral College did not elect the President that the popular vote had selected. Andrew Jackson was elected four years later anyway and was eventually instrumental in forming the Democratic Party as the people. Jackson was also instrumental in instituting rules liking the Electoral College with the popular vote. With the abolition of Electoral College we would be in a direct democracy of which the founding fathers were afraid. The will of the totality of masses over the will of individual states would then be the rule. To do this would allow the larger more populace states to control Presidential elections and therefore part of national and foreign policy. Therefore, keeping the electoral college is what the founding fathers would have wanted, as it insures that all state’s have the same amount to power as any other state in deciding who should be President and therefore the administration of the nations policies.
The debate over the Electoral College has a factor in the 2000 presidential election only because of perceived injustices in the tight election results. Prior to the 2000 election, most presidential elections were decided in landslide victories, so the abolishment of the Electoral College was a non-issue. The Electoral College, be it “not fair” to the will of the popular vote, it is a system that “the founders of the nation devised … as part of their plan to share power between the States and the national government. (http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html)” This system should not be abolished because of a close election result that can be seen as unfair (mostly to those individuals whose candidate lost). The problem with abolishing the system is that you take away from the states, the right to help chose whom they vote for in the Presidential election. The 12th Amendment, which was ratified on June 15, 1804, required electors to cast two distinct votes: one for President and another for Vice President, was a vast improvement over the previous system in which the top vote getter would be president and the runner-up became vice-president. The idea of abolishing the Electoral College and the election by popular vote would indeed, be applauded by many and seen as triumph for individual rights. However, the Founding Fathers vision was that the states would share in the power of choosing the President, Vice-President, and key to our Federal democracy in that state governments still yield some influence in federal government. The problem by allowing popular votes to decide the winner is that in the United States, we have had declining voter turnout for over twenty years and those who “got out the vote” for their respective political parties could in essence, have an influence on the winner. It is best to keep the current system and if it appears that there is a cycle of close presidential elections for years to come, that keep the spotlight upon the Electoral college as being flawed, then and only then, should be decide to change it.
I think that there should be a mixture of both direct and representative democracy. I feel that the majority should be direct and in the matter of a close call/vote, then the representative democracy should step in. States should put more public policy issues on the ballot because we are affected by the outcome. The majority of the population is “common” people with few elite people. When the representative democracy is in action, most people feel that all of the policies and laws that are passed, favor the elite because the Senate is thought to be made up of mostly elite people.
The pros of direct democracy are that the people get to directly decide what happens to them through voter incentives and can make laws through referendums. The cons would be that some people would not fully understand what exactly they are voting on or they are not fully-educated on the topic. There are some issues that are in-depth and can be confusing to people. Poor decisions could be made, making matters worse.
The pros of representative democracy are that the representative can make an informed decision for the people because the representative is well-educated in that area and understands the little “fine line” details that the common person may not be aware of. The cons of representative democracy would be that the representative might make decisions that are best for the representative and his family and not take the people into consideration. The representative could take only certain people in mind and be selfish and not consider what is best for the greatest number of people.
I believe that the Electoral College should absolutely not be abolished. As already stated it would open up the Pandora’s box of which our founding fathers were so cautious. The Electoral College prevents a number of issues and the major issue is that of the rule by direct majority. The founding fathers were right to be wary of such rule and to implement checks and balances to prevent abuses of power (though I feel that they would be horrified to see how theses checks and balances have been abused). To do away with the Electoral College would be to do away with one of theses and would provide more no benefit. However addressing the comments above mine about the low voter turn out being a reason that we should not do away with the Electoral College I would have to disagree. I believe that one of the reasons that we have such a low voter turn out is because people do not understand the system and feel that their votes don’t count so they just don’t vote. But if we changed to direct vote I believe that the voter turn out would sky rocket because people would feel more empowered and effective. Though I do not feel that people’s ignorance and increasing voter tune out is a good reason to do away with the electoral system. Also I was very impressed with the knowledge about the former system of electing the Vice President thought I do not believe that hit was necessarily a inferior system the thinking behind it was for the two most qualified people to be in the highest positions in our nation and to overcome differences by working together. Think what that could mean for us to day! It might do a lot to break down party walls.
I'm torn on this topic. The previous posts make good arguments for keeping the Electoral College in place. For the most part, I agree that the College is a necessary check to ensure that the Office of the President does not become too owing to the People. After all, how many times do we see Congress where the respective representatives act on the will of their state create legislation to the dismay of the President? Here's the rub: Not since the 2000 election has such emphasis been placed on the Electoral College. Now, political parties "target" the big states in an effort to win the electoral vote. What about the little guys? It's easy for me to see where states like Alaska or Montana would be somewhat apathetic about the Presidential election process. Of course, not understanding the system just fuels the apathy. I make an effort to teach my students how the system works. Of course, in their 15 year old minds, its just another case of "The Man" putting the screws to them. Not until the situation arises will it be possible to see the system work again. Every four years is not an ideal time frame in which to educate an entire nation. Because our society is based on "how it affects me TODAY", ongoing education in the system needs to be addressed so that the People understand the system. Any of you teacher wannabes care to comment, please do. With that all being said, I believe the Electoral College is a necessary institution in America. It is up to us to understand it so that our voice will continue to be heard.
Both sides to this argument makes since. American citizens put individuals in office to make decisions for us but we really don't know what the individual’s decision could be. We all know that politicians will do and say anything to get a vote. I guess if I had to vote on this I would vote on representative democracy. I don't know the actual percentage but not everyone votes in America. I can only speak for myself on this but a lot of times I don't have any knowledge on certain "issues of the day". That is why I voted on an individual to make those decisions for me. America has problems getting people to vote in the presidential election, how many people you think will actually vote on the "issues of the day". Our government would have serious problems if only ten percent of the population was voting on serious topics. I don't believe the correct decisions would get put in place. I guess I lean more towards a less direct democracy. I have faith in our government officials to make the right decisions. That is why they're politicians and I'm a business management major. If I wanted all my opinions to be put in place then I would run for office. I don't know about you but my life is pretty good up to this point so why change things that have put us in the position were in. Of course bad decisions are made everyday but I can't imagine how many there would be if society got to make all of them.
I think that our country is best run with a representative democracy over a direct democracy. Direct democracy would have its pros and cons. A pro would be that the power of our government would truly be in the hands of the average American. A con would be that the power of our government would be in the hands of the average Americans. I honestly believe that there is not a majority of the population that is qualified to make decisions regarding the welfare of our nation and individual states. Either people don't care about or don't know enough about the issues at hand. This is why we elect people to make these decisions for us. We put our trust in these people in hopes that they will make the decisions that coincide with our wants and beliefs. I'm not saying that they are doing a great job, but I think they are doing a better job that the average American voter would do.
Yes, i personally believe that the United States should abolish the electoral college. There have been three elections in our nations history where a candidate has won the election without winning the popular vote. Have checks and balances thoughout every aspect of our government is a very beneficial thing, but the electoral college has proven three times that its negative consequences outweigh the positive. Know matter what the scale or importance of the election, it is completely illogical for the candidate who received the most votes to lose. It defeats the purpose of an election if the person that was "elected" by the majority of the voters isnt the victor. Perphaps instead of abolishing the electoral college it should just be changed or altered in some way. I am very uneducated when it comes to the specifics of most political matters, but it seems as if, and this is as logical and self-explanitory as can be, the candidate that wins the electoral college should always have the popular vote too. I was under the impression the whole thing was determined by population anway. Obviously there is something that isnt working correctly if three times in our history the wrong candidate has won the presidency. Whether it be abolished or altered, something needs to be done about the electoral college, in my humble opinion
Post a Comment