Character Analysis for Parris in The Crucible

Essay by dmaniez3High School, 11th gradeA+, May 2008

download word file, 4 pages 0.0

The Electoral College is the name given to a group of electors who are nominated by political activists and party members within the states. The Electoral College really isn't necessary and should be abolished. There are numerous reasons why this is so. With the Electoral College in affect third parties don't have a chance to become the president, which isn't fair. Electors are expected to be honest but in the past our country has caught some untruthful ones. The Electoral College was created so long ago that it is now outdated, so we shouldn't even have electors, after all the Constitution of the U.S. is a "living document". People of the U.S. may think that they are participating in a direct election for the president, but with the Electoral College system technically, this isn't the case. I believe that the Electoral College should be done away with and a new system be devised.

Having only two candidates running for the leader of our country restricts our choices for president. If a third party wins the majority of the popular vote, that doesn't necessarily mean they will be the president because it's all up to the electors. If the candidate doesn't win the votes of the electors, they won't become President of the U.S., which would make the voters very unhappy. Luckily, this hasn't occurred yet but if it did it would really show how this system of electing doesn't do a good job of being fair. One real big issue with this system is that the elector doesn't have to vote by what the people want (Plumer 2).

There are many different possibilities that can be solutions for this problem. One of them is to test out a new system that goes by popular vote, instead of an electoral college. Another option for change is to create a voting system that goes by a percentage of 50 Electoral College and a percentage of 50 popular vote. There is also a way the states could come up with one vote for each state. Any one of these ideas would easily do a better job of creating a fair voting system. Some of them may be harder than others to devise a large scale voting system by, but they are great starter ideas that many people should consider for the common good of our country.

There is a great amount of reasons why people should agree with me. There is one simple reason, which is that it will make all future elections fairer. Also, it would actually please the people's majority and not just state legislatures or the elector's opinion. Another thing is that there would be less room for controversy. This is because when all votes get counted, that would be the final say and the people that didn't end up seeing the person they wanted in the Oval Office would have to just grit their teeth and bear with it.

There are quite a few possible objections that people could have. One possible objection is that someone could say that they believe that the elector system is better because it represents people that are more knowledgeable in politics. Another objection is that some people might say that it is a waste of time to worry about changing something that has been in effect for over 200 years and they might not really care who is elected president. There is also the possibility that some wouldn't like the change because the way it stands, it protects minorities and state's interests which may seem important to them. All of these objections could be brought to the table in many different forms, but they really can't compete with the equality factor.

I would answer these objections with the fact that everyone's opinion isn't represented equally with the Electoral College. Another way I would answer these is with the fact that the Electoral College has disrupted Presidential elections 15 times in U.S. history. Also, I would state the fact that if the candidate selected for President of the U.S. doesn't have popular vote from the nation, many citizens will question his or her authenticity (Sterling 2). One really good option I would use is to turn the tables around on them and ask "so do you feel better having someone else voting for the president? Are you incapable of making your own decisions?" By doing this, I believe that it would really get them thinking that it really doesn't make sense to have someone else represent or not represent their beliefs.

When a person really sits back and thinks about it, they would probably rather represent themselves instead of allowing someone else to do it for them. It also seems that this would have been changed a long time ago due to the "faithless electors" that don't vote for the party that their constituents would like to see as the President of the U.S. (Cresanta 3). The people of this country really need to be able to get active in political doings by researching and coming up with ways to represent their thoughts. If everyone put forth a little extra effort, there would be leaders of the country that better represented a larger majority of the people and not just certain areas and races. I really hope to one day see a leader of this country be voted in by popular vote.

Works CitedCresanta, Judy. The Electoral College. 11 Nov. 1996. Nevada Online. 16 Oct.

2007 .

Elections: The Electoral College. [Online image] Available, October 24, 2007.

Plumer, Bradford. The Indefensible Electoral College. 8 Oct. 2004. TheFoundation for National Progress. 16 Oct. 2007 .

Sterling, John. The Constitution. 9 Aug. 2005. Seaford Schools. 16 Oct. 2007 .