by Soloman Samuel

Created on: November 04, 2008   Last Updated: December 28, 2010

The Electoral College is necessary in providing a voice to all citizens of the United States. Its intended purpose is to prevent a state with a sizeable population from holding sway over states with lesser populations. Thus preventing what might be advantageous to a particular state from influencing a national agenda or imposing a will that could be detrimental to other states.

It should be agreed upon that the Electoral College warrants re-examination. But the argument that it should be abandoned is careless. One argument used is the California situation. While being home to 50 million plus residents, it carries, and rightly so, considerable Electoral College votes, 55. In contrast a state with a population that is much less, like Wyoming carries the minimum amount of votes, three. But to award California with more Electoral votes might ignore some important facts.

Of the population in California, the question must be asked, 'What is the population of "legal voters"?' It is well-documented the undue influence "illegal immigrants" carry with the politicians. Of course the population of a state is determined by the US Census data, however skewed. What this doesn't reflect though is the number of residents who are ineligible (legally) to vote. The reason why this is important is, those populations might not have the best interests of this nation at heart. And those politicians relying on those numbers curry favor and pass laws which might not have the nation's best interests in mind.

And not only that, to carry an overwhelming voice drowns out the wants, needs, and concerns of many inhabiting states with smaller numbers. What might be good for California, might not be ideal for those in New England. However, politicians who possess a more narrow viewpoint might be intent on forcing policies which are in complete disagreement with the ideals of a great many in other states.

There is no doubt, the mechanisms that operate the Electoral College need to be fine tuned. One example is the debacle in 2000. Nearly half of the residents in Florida were left without a say in the presidential election. The difference in votes amounted to less than 400 statewide. Yet all of Florida's 27 Electoral Votes went to one candidate. Same with most states, regardless of the difference in numbers of votes.

The exceptions? Maine and Nebraska. Maine carries four Electoral College votes, and Nebraska five. The reason why these states differ from the rest is, they award votes based on Congressional Districts. In Maine's case, there are two districts. A candidate may win either 1, 3, or 4 votes. A tie is impossible. One vote is awarded per district won, while the other two are awarded for the majority vote.

If each state were to adhere to this procedure then there are benefits beyond maintaining a more accurate picture of the electoral landscape. With recent news of voter fraud, mitigating that would be achieved by this transition. Rather than having fraud impact the entire state's electoral count, it would be isolated to each district. Therefore allowing those in charge of being better able to identify fraudulent ballots, as well as negating weight carried by the state's whole electoral cache.

The transition to this would be simple. Each district is already outlined per Representative, and each precinct is already managed by personnel knowledgeable of local procedures. To strive for the fairest and most accurate election should be the goal of every citizen who casts a vote. To have the fairest outcome is paramount in a democracy. A system that is representative of all citizens, all concerns, and electing a president that has the widest embodiment of its citizenry.

Learn more about this author, Soloman Samuel.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.