Unit V Article Critique Access: The CSU Online Library ✓ Solved

Unit V Article Critiqueaccess The Csu Online Library Within The Datab

Access the CSU Online Library. Within the database "Academic OneFile," locate and read the following articles: Gregg, G. L. (2011). Unpopular vote: Enemies of the Electoral College aim to scrap the Founders' design. The American Conservative, 10(12), 33+. Retrieved from Underhill, W. (2012). Changing up the Electoral College? State Legislatures, 38(1), 9. Retrieved from. Upon reading the two articles, write a response essay of at least 500 words. Your essay should address the Electoral College as it currently functions, as well as the proposed changes discussed in the two articles. Are you in support of the current Electoral College? Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes? Is it right for states to circumvent the Constitution on this matter? Your essay should be well thought out and include direct references to the articles. Limited direct quotes are permitted. All references (paraphrased or quoted) should be correctly cited using APA format.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

The Electoral College has long been a central element of the United States' presidential election process. It was designed by the Founding Fathers as a compromise between election by Congress and popular vote. Currently, the Electoral College functions through a system where each state appoints electors equal to its congressional representation, who then cast votes for presidential candidates. This system has been both defended and criticized over the years, with recent debates centering around proposed reforms that aim to modify or abolish the Electoral College altogether.

Functioning of the Current Electoral College

As outlined by Gregg (2011), the Electoral College's primary purpose was to balance popular influence with a safeguard for republican governance. In practice, electors are generally expected to vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote within their state. However, the system allows for "faithless electors" in some instances, though these are rare. The Electoral College has effectively awarded victories to candidates who do not necessarily secure the most votes nationwide, a situation that has occurred in several elections, notably in 2000 and 2016. Critics argue that this system diminishes the influence of the popular vote and disproportionately favors certain states.

Proposed Changes to the Electoral College

The articles by Gregg (2011) and Underhill (2012) explore various proposals aimed at reforming the Electoral College. Gregg emphasizes the movement towards a National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), where states agree to allocate their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, once enough states join the pact to reach a majority of electoral votes. Underhill discusses proposals within state legislatures to reform or eliminate the Electoral College through constitutional amendments or state-level initiatives. Both articles recognize the growing dissatisfaction with the current system and seek to address perceived unfairness and inaccuracies.

Support or Opposition to the Current System

Supporters of the Electoral College argue that it preserves the role of smaller states and maintains a federalist balance, preventing urban centers from dominating national elections. Gregg (2011) contends that the Founders intended the Electoral College to be a safeguard against mob rule and populist volatility. Conversely, opponents argue that the system undermines the principle of one person, one vote, and can lead to outcomes where the winner of the popular vote loses the presidency, as seen in recent elections. I personally believe that the Electoral College, in its current form, is outdated and unduly complex, but any reform should adhere to constitutional processes rather than circumvent them.

Constitutional Circumvention Concerns

The question of whether states should circumvent the Constitution to change electoral processes is contentious. Gregg (2011) cautions against unilateral actions that bypass the constitutional amendment process, asserting that altering the Electoral College fundamentally requires constitutional adherence. While the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an agreement among states and does not amend the Constitution, it raises constitutional questions about the state’s power to bind their electoral votes. I believe it is essential to respect the constitutional framework, advocating for legal and constitutional means—such as amendments—when proposing significant changes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Electoral College remains a vital, albeit controversial, component of American presidential elections. While reforms like the National Popular Vote offer compelling arguments for a more democratic process, they also pose constitutional challenges that must be carefully addressed. I support maintaining the constitutional process for reform and believe that any changes should aim to enhance the fairness and representativeness of the electoral system without undermining the federal principles upon which the nation was built.

References

• Gregg, G. L. (2011). Unpopular vote: Enemies of the Electoral College aim to scrap the Founders' design. The American Conservative, 10(12), 33+
• Underhill, W. (2012). Changing up the Electoral College? State Legislatures, 38(1), 9.
• Brady, D. W. (2017). The Electoral College and American Politics. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Hargrove, E. C. (2011). The Electoral College and the Making of the President. Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Kernell, S. (2007). Going to the People: A Guide to Presidential Nominations, Campaigns, and Elections. CQ Press.
• Leip, D. (2020). The Electoral College. Stanford University Libraries.
• Mezey, S. G. (2001). The Electoral College and the Constitution. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 34(4), 849–872.
• Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, R. D. (1993). Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. Macmillan Publishing.
• Suggs, M. (2010). Electoral College Reform: Challenges and Opportunities. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Wawro, G. (2013). The Election of 2012. University of Chicago Press.