Christine S. New York

Electoral College

The electoral college process questions the value of an individual's presidential vote.

Dear Mr or Mrs. President, 

Every four years, the gathering of multiple politicians, from differing states and experience, enter a race in which American citizens vote for potential presidential candidates of the United States. Although a new President is not always assured, citizens engage in some aspects of politics during presidential debates, where candidates discuss their interesting ideas to make up for what the country lacks. During the process of determining the US' following President, the electoral college must take effect. However, this complicated system flaunts the flaws of the American voting system and questions an American's individual vote. 

The federal government's authority depends on its citizens; the citizens of a nation give their government power, not vice versa. Without the people, of a democratic country, a strong ruling government would not exist. If the government shifts over to corrupt, unethical intentions, citizens will rebel to overthrow their fraudulent authority. That being said, citizens should be capable of controlling the growth and development of their nation. Therefore, citizens should get to choose a president that they see fit for office, without obstacles such as government control. In some way, citizens are able to choose a president for office. Of course, there are debates, elimination of candidates, and the majority vote. However, the election of a president is determined by the electoral college, not by the citizens themselves. This doesn't make sense. A citizen's vote should pertain remarkable value during the election process, it should mean something. 

Due to the obstacle, the government creates by having the electoral college take effect, naturally, citizens question the value of their vote, resulting in a significant decline of participation in politics. There are 538 electors in the electoral college, while each state is given a minimum of three votes, the worth of a vote varies. Votes within a smaller state are worth more than votes distributed by larger states. This is flawed by the voting's distribution method. Safe states, states that have previously shown continuous support of one party, are not as important than swing states during the presidential race. According to candidates, votes from swing states are much more valuable. This is because swing states often alter their party every four years. In addition to the distribution method, it is possible to win the election with only 21.8% of the majority vote. Although citizens may show disfavor in one candidate, their votes don't stop that candidate from losing. In cases where a candidate fails to reach a high majority vote, the electoral college is still capable of placing this candidate into office. Surprisingly, the value of votes from the electoral college completely surpasses those of individual citizens. 

Since the US is a democratic- republican country, citizen's should be the ones to completely elect presidents rather than being fooled into thinking that is the case, when it's not. Not only would this establish the dependency of the people, which is overall true, but this would also encourage more citizens to vote. Take out the electoral college or change the system. Instead of the electoral college taking effect at the end of the election, have it take effect in the beginning only. Rather than electing the president, the electoral college may elect candidates they believe have correct intentions. After that, the winner depends on the majority vote, not the votes from a corrupt system. Stop belittling the votes of citizens, make it fair. 


Christine Santos

East-West School of International Studies

Government - 6th Period

EWSIS 12th Grade Government - Mr. Jacobson and Mr. Pierini

All letters from this group →