Introduction
The book focuses on telling why the electoral college is wrong for Americans by analyzing the intentions of the process framers and where they went wrong. The author explains how the electoral process works based on the preferences of the developers to achieve political equality (pg. 12, par. 1). Amongst the many reasons to frame the process was to maintain federalism, preserve the political party system, and make elections effective (pg. 117, par. 9). Using the example of the 2016 election, where the congress vote weighed down the popular vote, the book’s author says the electoral college is bad for denying the wish of Americans (pg. 177, par. 6). The book writer criticizes the college developers for failing to make it compulsory for the electors to vote for the person who won the popular vote in their states. I will use this source to support my argument by giving the advantages and limitations of the electoral college based on the existing election practices.
Discussion
The purpose of the book is to discuss the electoral college by providing the pros and cons of the process based on the past experiences of American elections. The author begins by showing how the college works based on the number of votes available for the congress vote and how many votes a candidate must have to win the presidency (pg. 4, par. 2). The college is good because it balances power between the popular and congress vote, prevents regional power control, and creates an apparent winner for the country (pg. 8, par. 1). The college has cons, such as the selected electors may not vote as expected, it gives some voters more power than others, and it may not represent the will of the people (pg. 26, par. 1). This source will be used to support arguments by first showing why the electoral college is essential and how Americans have benefited from it. It will also help to prove that the electoral college has inconsistencies that have interfered with American elections in the past.
The article shows how the electoral college diminishes and disenfranchises the people’s voting power in a specific geographic region. The authors begin by admitting that the college is necessary for checks and balances of power amongst various government branches and sectors (par. 1). However, using the example of Monte Carlo to prove that although all voters are given a chance to select a leader, some regions are disadvantaged (par. 12). Monte Carlo was used to randomly simulate the election process by indicating that all qualified voters have an opportunity to vote for or against a candidate (par. 18). The study compared the voting population of Monte Carlo with several others across the US to indicate disparities in voting power (par. 38). This source will be essential to show that although voters in the country are given a chance to select the president of their choice, some regions are disadvantaged by the college process.
The American National Archives’ official website explains the electoral college process by giving the most basic information about the same. Clearing the assumptions by many that it is a place, the website provides that the college is a process in which the US elects the next president and vice president (par. 1). Although the electoral college is not in the US constitution, the founders of the constitution also established the college to be a compromise between the popular vote and the congress vote during the presidential election (par. 1). Many proposals have been made to eliminate or reform the college, amongst them from the American Bar Association, which criticizes the college for being ambiguous and archaic (par. 3). The website provides that improving an electoral process that has been used for more than 235 years for elections in America is not only challenging but almost impossible (par. 5). I will use this source to explain why the electoral college is essential for Americans.
The book explains why Americans need the electoral college in three sections covering the college founders’ intentions, the presidents who lost the popular vote, and the people in charge of the college. The author provides that although the college favors republicans more than democrats, it offers the benefits of promoting democracy through the credibility of an old institution (pg. 6, par. 4). Reviewing the past elections where the president lost the popular vote, the writer shows that the college is an old, powerful tool significant in keeping the American constitution intact (pg. 10, par. 1). The college involves or combines all the government representatives, thus giving a reliable decision which, although it may seem different, represents the people’s will (pg. 16, par. 8). The book concludes that even if there are moments of doubt regarding college, Americans still need it. This source will be helpful to formulate arguments for the electoral college based on the history of the presidents who lost the popular vote and the relationship of the college with other institutions.
The article covers the role of leaders in a country and their influence on the electoral college to solve or prevent a political crisis. A country’s top leaders, often the constitution makers, dictate how power is shared and is often shaped by the society’s beliefs (par. 1). Based on a political crisis in Ghana, Africa, the electoral systems of a country shaped by a constitution are far better than one simulated by the will of the people (par. 8). The American constitution formulates the electoral college to represent the will of the people by considering not only the beliefs and practices of the society but also their best interests (par. 13). An electoral process like the college is critical because when a political crisis stems from the election process, applying its practices is the same as relying on the constitution, thus making the most democratic decisions (par. 20). This source is vital to show how the electoral college is essential in supporting democracy and the will of the people.
Conclusion
The article discusses how the electoral college cross-validation process reveals weaknesses of the system based on the credibility of the person finally elected. The method of cross-validation, where the popular vote is not enough and congress has to vote again to ensure the credibility of the person selected, and the president and vice, is not always accurate (par. 1). One of the distinct weaknesses of the process is that the model is made of unstable choices of candidates, who may not be the best prediction of the future (par. 7). Therefore, the outcome of singling out one candidate based on the prediction errors may not convey practical information regarding how much the winner can be trusted (par. 10). The source concludes that although cross-validation in the electoral process is done to find the apparent winner, there is no guarantee that the candidate who wins the election is the best (par. 15). This article will be used to show that the college process lacks credibility and may not be the best choice for Americans.
References
Edwards III, G. C. (2019). Why the electoral college is bad for America. Yale University Press.
Edwards, S. (2019). The electoral college. Weigl Publishers.
Haas, C. J., Pielak, I., & Steele, I. (2023). 235 years since the electoral college: A probabilistic consideration of voting power. Department of Political Science, 1-23. Web.
National Archives. (n.d.). The electoral college. Archives. Web.
Ross, T. (2019). Why we need the electoral college. Gateway Editions.
Owusu-Mensah, I. (2022). The role of the kingmakers and the electoral college system in the Dagbon chieftaincy crisis. African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 22(1), 93-119. Web.
Zhan, Z., & Yang, Y. (2022). Profile electoral college cross-validation. Information Sciences, 586, 24-40. Web.