Ben Stanelle

Sam Hackworth

English 102

February 12th 2016

Do we still need the Electoral College?

I have always been curious about why the United States uses the Electoral College system instead of determining the presidency off of a Popular Vote. It has always seemed to me that the Electoral College was an out of date method of deciding the president. Something that was necessary back when taking a Nationwide Popular Vote seemed implausible. However with technology now a days it seems strange to still declare a winner by state, and have the members of the given chosen party vote in the Electoral College; it's not like it makes the process any quicker. Now a days the popular vote is always right next to the Electoral College votes on your screen wither you're watching MSNBC, Fox News, or any Television News Channel on Election Day. However no matter how many times you see the popular vote change and update on Election Day it is an almost meaningless number, it is the Electoral College that will ultimately decide the outcome of the vote. Seeing as the most recent presidential election was in 2014 when I was 17, I was unable to vote so it may seem curious why I would choose to write about a system that I have yet to directly be a part of. However I believe that our right as American to vote is one of our most important rights. That's why I would like to see the system changed because I plan on voting in presidential elections for the rest of my life. 

Walter Hickey, "The Electoral College Is Brilliant, And We'd Be Insane to Abolish it," Business Insider, October 3rd. 2012. February 6th. 2016.  

Hickey is making his case for why he believes that the Electoral College is just as important and well-functioning system now as it ever was. Hickey Starts by saying "He understands why one might think the Electoral College system is unjust, however he makes several claims that would lead you to believe otherwise" (Hickey). Hickeys first major evidence is that the framers of the constitution set up the Electoral College because they wanted the states to choose the President.  As well Hickey brings up the fact that more rural states would be skipped in the campaign season seeing as not enough people live there to make it worth a stop on a Presidential candidate's campaign. The final major piece of evidence is that winning the Electoral College can be a good indication of whether a president will be successful or not. This is because it shows that they are good at making decisions that deal with resource allocation, something that the president has to deal a lot with. Walter Hickey writes for the politics section of Business Insider. Hickey is a credible source because the source that he is writing for has credibility. Business Insider would not receive this credibility if they hired writers that were not credible as well. Hickeys article is biased because it is clear that he things the Electoral college is important and should be kept. Therefore he is presenting the information in a way that makes the reader want to keep the Electoral College.  

n.p. "Why do we have the Electoral College" Archieves.gov. U.S National Archives and Record Administration. N.d. Web. February 3rd 2016.

In this article the US NARA makes the Claim that there needs to be a change to the way the Electoral College works. Although the author of this article does make a weak argument by not proposing an answer to their claim, this article did have very good evidence for changing the Electoral College system. The first piece of evidence the NARA gives us is that in the last 200 years there has been over 700 proposals in congress to change the Electoral College. Although there has never been a change to it, the Electoral College is the most discussed topic in the history of congress. The next piece of evidence is a study done amongst lawyers on whether or not they agree with the Electoral College. This study seems extremely credible to me because it is taken amongst only lawyers, or people who have a better understanding then the normal person on Laws. Finally the NARA points out that in the 1992 election Ross Perot won 19% of the popular vote. However Perot did not win a single vote in the Electoral College. The value being discussed in this article is whether or not you believe the Electoral College is a fair way of determining the presidency. I believe that my source is credible to discuss such a topic because the NARA is directly involved in the record keepings for the Electoral College. This article contains bias because the numbers and stats stated do not tell the whole story and makes no case for the counter argument. 

n.a. "Big Question: Why do we still have the Electoral College?" Magazine. Marquette. Edu. Marquette Magazine, summer 2014

This article starts off by giving some background on the Electoral College. The author explains that Alexander Hamilton believed the Electoral College would lead to a sort of insight amongst voters. Most other Constitutional framers thought that the Electoral College was a good way to protect states' rights.  The major claim being made in this article is that even though the Electoral College may seem outdated it is the method that we use to select the president and should not be changed. The first piece of evidence was that the author claims that small states would be ignored in a system were the popular vote determines the winner. Also the Electoral College tends to reflect the outcome of the popular vote; it just presents a clearer winner. This article comes from a credible source because the author of this article writes for Marquette Magazine and educational magazine. This article contains bias because the author would like to keep the electoral college. This means that the majority of fact and points brought up in this article lead the reader to think the Electoral College is good. 

In my two articles that argue that the Electoral College, despite being old, is still the best method in determining who the president will be, "The Electoral College Is Brilliant, And We'd Be Insane to Abolish it", and "Why Do we Still Need the Electoral College," some shared views that the authors have are that it would keep presidential candidates in more states instead of focusing on just those with large populations. Also both articles brought up that the framers of the constitution wanted the states to determine the president not just the nationwide majority. Both these articles were in contrast to my article that claimed that we would be better off without the Electoral College, "Why Do we Have the Electoral College". This article points out that although changing to a popular vote would keep presidential candidates out of states with low population this article brought up the fact that this is something that already happens, as well many candidates skip states with huge populations whose outcomes they have already determined and instead only tend to campaign in a few key swing states. My sources all had different perspectives on the Electoral College and this has changed my thinking on the subject. Going forward my research will be focused towards building a solid argument for the Interstate Compact to get around the Electoral College. As well I will work to find information that calls into question the credibility of the counterarguments. 

Work Cited

Walter Hickey, "The Electoral College Is Brilliant, And We'd Be Insane to Abolish it," Business Insider, October 3rd. 2012. February 6th. 2016.

n.p. "Why do we have the Electoral College Archieves.gov. U.S National Archives and Record Administration. N.d. Web. February 3rd 2016.

n.a. "Big Question: Why do we still have the Electoral College?" Magazine. Marquette. Edu. Marquette Magazine, summer 2014
