Democracy, interesting word, right? When one hears democracy, you’d think it means having your voice heard, having your voice matter, however, is that always ever the case in the United States, or politics in general? The electoral college is a fine example of where the United Stated went wrong. To put it simple, for those who do not what the electoral college is, they’re essentially the body of individuals chosen by state by voters, who at the end, picks who our president is. The electors soul purpose was to act as a filter to ensure the presidential election was faithfully carried out, and to prevent certain unqualified, dangerous, people from entering office- but I’m sure we realized that they’ve failed at that countless times past and present. For my research topic, I wanted to look into something that make sense, and fits my interests. With that, I thought, instead of getting rid of the college in a whole, why not repurpose it? And so, I’ve decided to dig a bit deeper because I found it quite interesting due to the fact something so important is so pointless. My question was, “The electoral college is defined in the constitution, what stops electors from being bias as to who they elect?” So that makes me wonder, instead of giving so much power to a group of individuals, why not have them just act as a trial, a court that investigates the two presidential candidates, dives into their pasts, or even restructure it in any way that gives it actual purpose and efficiency; to ensure the United States has a leader with a fair history to hold one of the highest honors in the world. So then, I found a article that carried my exact thoughts out.
Foley, Edward B. An Idea for Electoral College Reform That Both Parties Might Actually Like. 12 Jan. 2019.
In this law review article, it dives straight into the mysteries of the electoral college. This article seems to have a neutral stance regarding the college. As stated in the article, “Another idea: A state could award all of its electoral votes to a candidate who receives a majority of the state’s popular vote, but if no candidate does, then the state would apportion its electoral votes among the candidates.” I believe the point of this article which is important to note, is that it seems to take more of a strategic approach to the electoral college, which correlates to my original l research question. There’s quite a few important points stated in this article, but it is important to see the main point being made is that the college has had an exceptionally long run of attempts to reform, abolish, and so forth. So, instead of trying to remove it as a whole, we should approach it in a way where the American people’s voices are heard, but there’s also a safety net in place to ensure the legitimacy of the election. The most important point of the other hand, is stated as, “The 12th Amendment left in place the power of states to appoint their electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,” consistent with the Jeffersonians’ commitment to federalist”. From this quote, it essentially highlights the fact that the power is given to these electors, but how it is used is all based on their morals, views, and thus forth.
Personally for me, I am also neutral in the matters of the electoral college. While of course it would be easy for anyone to say, “abolish it!”, “it’s unfair!”, yes, that may be true, but just like anything else, there needs to be some sort of filter within the presidential election. Otherwise, that’s setting the county up for major catastrophe. An example, a A-list celebrity that has no prior experience in law, business, or anything virtually helpful in politics, might run to be president. In the supposed case they win, it’s putting someone who has no clue what they are doing, or going to do, in office, which is very tragic. We most remember that the electoral college’s role within the elections are essentially **TO ACT AS A FILTERING COMMITTEE OF A SORTS**, however, over the past few years, it has lots sight of its true purpose. While it is easy to simply say, “REFORM THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE THEN!!!!!”, we must be asking ourselves this: What are we doing as a society to help secure democracy required to create change? Now, going back to my researching question, “The electoral college is defined in the constitution, what stops electors from being bias as to who they elect?” Well quite frankly, there are mechanisms in place usually as the recent Supreme Court ruling stating that all electors must go by the states votes. On the other hand, you have secret donations being funneled to electors prior to voting, funneled to their campaigns, charities, centers; its non-stop. So at the end, it now comes down to not asking what stops the electors from being bias as to who they elect, but rather, what’s being set in place to ensure the morals, dignity and honor set forth in these prestigious positions, are upheld? Nevertheless, in politics, it seems to always end up being a never ending trial of unanswered questions, illegal interactions, hidden emails, scandals, orange spray tans, and well – I’m sure you know where I’m getting at; I can go on. With that, sight of what truly matters ends up being lost. Until these things are addressed, humanity is considered, no true progress would ever be made.
“The force of inertia is strong, to be sure. But overcoming lack of political will is easier than passing a constitutional amendment.”