Spatafore 1

Ariel Spatafore

Hackney 2A

English 101

15 December 2017

Electoral College
The Electoral college has been around for hundreds of years, but is this system

outdated. Should the electoral college be abolished? The Electoral college was created

at a time when most of the population was not educated and could not be trusted to

make a smart educated vote. In this day in age where everyone has a basic education

and most people have at least a high school diploma, do we still need this middle man?

Some people believe that citizens still can not be trusted with their individual votes. In

2016 Donald Trump was elected as president of the united states by the electoral

college, even though by the popular vote Hillary Clinton won by millions. This was the

second time this has happened since 2000. This topic brings about many questions and

as of right now no concrete solutions. In this modern era do we decide to stay the same

or do we change? In Akhil Reed Amars article on the electoral college his stance is to

abolish the electoral college. Whereas Charles Frieds argument is to keep the electoral

college. However, I stand firmly with the stance that the electoral college should be

abolished. The problem with the electoral college is that the times have changed, we no

longer need the electoral college choosing a candidate for us.

Of the the people, by the people, for the people, is a common phrase when you

think of our government . Is this statement still true today? In the passage States Dont

Use an Electoral College to Choose Their Leader, Neither Should the Nation Akhil
 Spatafore 2

Reed Amar talks about the system in which the states use to elect their governors and

the problems with the electoral college today. With the last presidential election still

looming in many americans minds there is time to wonder if the government still has the

people's interest in mind. Americans, like me want to know if the government is serving

us or their own crooked agendas. In recent news there was a vote to repeal net

neutrality only based off of the votes of five people, who most of which voted contrary to

what the people wanted. Same goes for the last presidential election where Donald

trump only won the electoral college not the popular vote, thereby winning the

presidential election to many americans disbelief. So how do we fix this government

bias? Akhil Reed Amar talks about how are states have a direct election to elect their

officials. He ponders the question of why none of the states use an electoral college but

the national government still does. Some argument for the electoral college are many

standard arguments for the Electoral College recount nightmares, fairness for rural

areas, etc. are makeweight. If these arguments were truly sound, then states are

stupid. And states are not stupid. (Amar). Amar uses the idea that if the electoral

college is truly as useful s he national government makes it out to be then all of the

states would use it to elect their governors. Having a direct presidential election would

allow for more peoples vote to have a say in who the next leader of the country is. Not

to mention the fact that more people would be encouraged to vote by the states wanting

more votes. MOre and more young people are discouraged to vote by the fact that they

think that their vote does not really mean anything, if they are not voting in favor of what

the electoral college votes. Though this idea is great in theory but realistically it could
 Spatafore 3

cause the state to have too much power over one another, therefore we would need

oversight from the federal government. Amar states in his argument that in 2001 he

floated an idea of a system that could possibly work once the technical wrinkles were

worked out. This idea allows both presidential candidates to agree to abide by the

popular vote. These new and upcoming ideas bring us much hope for the future of

presidential politics.

Charles Fried a law professor at Harvard law and was also the solicitor general of

the united states, argues that abolishing the electoral college would give to much power

to the states. In contrary to Amars beliefs of changing the government to wok with

today, Fried uses history of the government as his logic. In the passage fried states,

Even after a civil war and two world wars, the states control a large measure of the

laws, administration and finance that have an impact on the lives of ordinary citizens.

(fried). Fried uses the idea that the states already have a large amount of power and

have had this much power since the civil war. Not only does charles fried believe that

the states already have enough power he also says that our government basically

already has a form of direct democracy. Using this logic he states that because of the

fact that the representatives of the electoral college are elected directly the people

already have a say. This argument is not solid when you consider the fact that these

elected officials could be working on their own selfish agendas and not in favor of the

people when they make decisions on who to vote for. Fried says that this form of

government was chosen in the beginning and we should continue to use it because it

has worked. Though that is true, this form of government has worked in the past, time
 Spatafore 4

shave changed and we should have a form of government that changes with us. Fried

highlights the caution of the presidential election, sometimes it will happen that, as this

year, there will be a significant divergence -- millions of votes -- between who is chosen

by the Electoral College and the winner of the overall popular vote. Sometimes that

disparity can act as a caution to the elected president (fried). This logic that Fried uses

does not have the people in mind it highlights caution to the future president, not what

the people want. Charles Frieds argument is pushed by the idea that this government

that has been chosen and it should stay that way in order to keep the balance of power.

Throughout history we see the idea of what democracy change, from what

ancient greece though was democracy, to rome. These ideas have changed throughout

the years to suit the times. Is it possible that our idea of what truly fair democracy is

could be wrong too? The idea that our government is perfect the way it is and should

not be chnages is ignorant and naive. With the facts from the recent election showing us

that this form of election we are using is obsolete and needs an update it is time for a

change. This big of a change may take awhile and many trials and error, but we will

never know if it will work until we try to make a difference. Let's make the statement of

the people, by the people, for the people true in our modern government.
 Spatafore 5

Works cited

Fried , Charles, and Akhil r Amar. The New York Times Company. The New York

Times, The New York Times, 16 Nov. 2016,

www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/11/16/should-the-electoral-college-be-abolished