● Questions
○ Pro
■ How can the United States be considered a republic if it removes one of
the major sources of state autonomy
■ If the Electoral College is arbitrary, does that not also invalidate Congress,
specifically the House
■ Is our current system, compared to European countries such as Germany,
not simpler and more efficient?
■ Would abolishing the Electoral College not diminish the focus on smaller
states in exchange for urban areas?
■ How would a direct democracy handle recounts?
○ Con
■ Does the electoral college not incentivize the candidates to focus on
swing states as opposed to a more overall approach to campaigning
■ How can the Electoral College represent the people when you can lose
the popular vote and win the election?
■ Are the votes of citizens of smaller states not overrepresented in the
electoral college?
■ How is every person getting a direct say in the choosing of their leader
not the ultimate form of democracy?
■ Has the general population not shown that they want a replacement for
the Electoral College?
● Paragraphs
○ Pro
■ While the Electoral College is not a perfect system, it is better than a
direct democracy for the United States. We are a republic, with 50 states,
that builds into one country. Because of this, having a direct election
directly undercuts the state's relative autonomy. Additionally, by arguing
that the Electoral College does not represent the people of the states, you
undermine both the executive and legislative branches as the same
method to determine the number of electors each state receives is the
same as the method that determines the House Representative.
Ultimately, the Electoral College is a crucial facet of making the United
States a democratic republic
■ Those who say that the electoral college needs to be abolished
continuously come back to the argument of “One Person, One Vote”. This
argument, however, is fundamentally flawed. The most important thing to
understand about this is that, while each vote across the country does not
necessarily equal the same, they add to roughly the same within the state
because of electoral districts, which are required to be roughly the same
due to a variety of court cases. By abolishing the Electoral College, we
remove this and instead take the power from the hands of everybody in
the states and instead focus it entirely on major cities, an issue that is
already present and would be worsened with the abolition of the Electoral
College
○ Con
■ The Electoral College undermines the principle of equal representation in
a democracy by giving disproportionate weight to smaller states. Voters in
states like Wyoming, Vermont, and Alaska have significantly more
influence per capita than those in populous states like California or Texas.
This violates the democratic idea of "one person, one vote," leading to
outcomes where the candidate who wins the national popular vote can
lose the presidency. Such outcomes challenge the legitimacy of the
election process and erode public trust in the system, which, as a result
no longer aligns with the will of the majority of voters.
■ Additionally, the Electoral College distorts campaign strategies, as
candidates focus on a handful of "swing states" while ignoring the vast
majority of the country. States that are solidly Democratic or Republican
receive little attention, leaving millions of voters feeling neglected and
underrepresented. This system also reinforces political polarization, as
the focus on battleground states further marginalizes regions that are not
politically competitive. A direct popular vote would ensure that every vote
counts equally, encouraging candidates to campaign nationwide and
giving every voter a stake in the election
