Electoral College, Pros and Cons, and its Implications on Campaigns and Election Outcomes

U.S. Electoral Process
Name:
Institution:
Course code:
Date:
Introduction
The United States general election is anything but straightforward due to the involvement of an Electoral College. According to the country’s founding fathers, the process compromises the voting of the president Congress and the popular vote of qualified citizens. This compromise ensures that large states do not dominate the small ones by balancing the power between Congress and State legislatures. In 1804, a 12th Amendment to the Constitution ensured that electors would designate their votes for presidential and vice-presidential candidates in the forthcoming elections. In the event of a tie, the 12th amendment provides a tie braking system where the House of Representatives breaks a tie on presidential electoral votes, and the Senate breaks a tie-on vice-presidential electoral vote. The Electoral College has been active since then in subsequent general elections. Over the years, it has voted candidates into office by extremely slight margins. For instance, in 1960, John Kennedy became the president despite defeating Richard Nixon by less than 120,000 popular votes. Other instances show electors failing to vote for the candidates they pledged to, as was the case in the matchup between Michael Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen for the vice-presidency. Recently, Donald Trump won the 2016 Electoral College garnering him the victory despite trailing in the popular vote by almost three million ballots. Such events have raised questions as to whether the Electoral College is a constructive tool for promoting democracy. This paper analyzes the Electoral College process, its pros and cons, and its implications on campaigns and election outcomes. Also, the paper will reflect on the role of individual states in election outcomes and consequences on the country’s democracy.
Overview
As the original rationale, the Electoral College was created to compromise at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. The small States in attendance worried that States such as s Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia would dominate the country’s presidency. Consequently, the compromise ensured that each State was allocated Electoral College votes in proportion to its number of Senators and House members CITATION Dar20 \l 1033 (West, 2020). This process is advantageous to small states since each State is represented by two senators regardless of its size. However, it is also beneficial to larger states because House members are based on a state’s population.
Each State is allocated an elector based on its members of the House and Senate. Combined with Washington D. C’s three electors, the Electoral College process involves 538 electors. Each political party chooses a slate of potential electors; however, they are chosen in the respective states. A winning presidential candidate will have the potential electors appointed as the State’s electors except in Nebraska and Maine. In the two states, the winner of the general election receives two electors. The winner of each congressional district may be the same as the overall winner or a different candidate to whom one elector is awardedCITATION Nat211 \l 1033 (Archives, 2021...