by Austin T

Created on: November 07, 2008   Last Updated: September 10, 2009

The electoral college has been at the center of a lotof controversy lately as people begin to doubt its use. The doubt first began to rise after the 2000 election where Gore lost the election due to his electoral votes, not popular votes. It seems odd, in perspective, that the majority of the people of the United States have no say in the turnout of the election.

The way the electoral college is currently, all votes that a state has go to the popular winner for the state. In the past, however, an electorate - an official chosen to vote as a representative for part of a state - had the choice of who they would cast their vote for. This proved ineffective in a democratic society and was banned in all states because the public truly had no say in the election. Casting all votes to one candidate in a state as large as California appears to be unnecessary and undemocratic. In a country where the leader is elected by the public, shouldn't the public have more of an influence than just "winner takes all" in a state. The election two days ago had a record turnout because of hits historic nature and, although we did not have a repeat of 2000, the popular vote for the two candidates was very close. The electoral votes, however, reflected something very different. The electoral votes for Obama were double McCain's when the popular vote reflected that Obama had only won by 7 million. In some areas, that is the size of a city.

It is clear that the electoral college does not elect the right president in some cases and, in all cases, many Americans' voices are not heard. It is important to remember that we live in a democracy where the people have a full say in how their country is run. If the electoral votes were split within as state proportionally to the popular vote for the state, then it would be much more effective. It's current state, however, is nothing short of disorderly and no longer valid. Fortunately, some states have taken the initiative to change the system and for example, Gary D. Halbert of Pro Futures Investments writes that "a possible change in the way Colorado allocates its nine Electoral College votes could affect the outcome of the 2004 election.Colorado will have an initiative on its ballot on November 2 to split the states' electoral votes based on the popular vote, rather than the current winner-take-all system." This is a positive turn for our country and with a little push-start, our country will be well on its way to achieve a true democracy.

Learn more about this author, Austin T.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.