(1-A) Perhaps one of the most deceiving aspects of the United States presidential election is the widespread belief that presidents are elected by popular vote. In truth, presidents are elected by a specific number of individuals who make up an electoral college. This distinction reveals that when citizens cast their votes for president, they are in actuality voting for a candidate’s electoral representation (who are party-selected individuals not working for the federal government) (Sahr, “Operation...”). The procedure for distributing electoral votes within the state is chosen “by a process determined by each state” (Fiorina 49). The vast majority of states employ the “winner-take-all” method, in which the candidate receiving a plurality of the states’ popular votes will get all of the electoral votes (Fiorina 297). However, there are two states, Maine and Nebraska, which distribute the electoral votes among the state senators and the congressional districts (Lecture, February 6). Each state selects the same number of electors as it has senators and representatives in Congress, creating a sum total of 538 members of the electoral college. When t

De Pangher, Everett. “The Electoral College: An Unacceptable Way to Elect Our President.” The President Elect. 7 February 2002.

The adoption of such a plan would have a number of effects on current election practices. Most importantly, it would eliminate the “winner-take-all” system of awarding electoral votes. In this way, there would be no blanket approval/disapproval for specific candidates or parties and would instead reflect statewide differences in candidate support. This would give greater weight to individual voters within states that are predominantly supportive of a certain political party. In the last decade, demographic trends have shown that a number of citizens in northern states (often Democratic) have begun to relocate to southern states (often Republican) (Sahr, “American...”). This system would give these relocated citizens the same influence they had in their previous state (De Pangher). For the general voting population, it would help to negate the idea that individual votes carry no value because voters would essentially be electing an electoral representative from within a much smaller arena. At the same time, presidential hopefuls would be inclined to visit more states, contact more voters, and educate and enlighten more widespread individuals with their attention and resources.

senators while the winner in each of the states’ congressional districts would receive the votes from that district. This is the same system currently in practice in both Maine and Nebraska (Lecture, February 6).

with our presidential election system and experience less disappointment and disillusionment

“Possible Reforms of the U.S. Election Process.” election reform.hnd, 4 February 2002.

As the presidential election of 2000 demonstrates, the electoral college has a

Some topics in this essay:
Representatives Fiorina, Lecture February, Maine Nebraska, De Pangher, Electoral College, EC Third, Electoral College”, Lecture January, electoral college, Delahunt Obviously, Election Process”, electoral votes, february 2002, institutional arrangement, 4 february, 7 february, 7 february 2002, de pangher, 4 february 2002, popular vote, lecture february 6, february 6, lecture february, national archives records, effect voter turnout,