A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by Popular Vote (Essay Sample)

Critical Response: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by Popular Vote
Student Name
Institution
Critical Response: Electing the President by Popular Vote
In the article, "A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by Popular Vote”, John R. Koza examines the shortcomings in the current electoral system for electing the president in the United States. Every vote is equally important in the election for president of the United States. The significance of the vote is regardless of the state in which the votes are. The presidency candidate who gathers more votes becomes the winner. However, the current system of electing the president does not fulfill the condition of the importance of the votes; hence calls for a reform in the Electoral College.
The contemporary system of electing the president has disadvantages. The national popular vote is an interesting idea with pro and con. All the state’s electoral votes are to the winning candidate in the state. The states in which the candidate is the winner receive less attention during campaigns. The system makes the presidential candidate ignore the smaller state and focus on the states with a large population. The candidate, therefore, ignores two third of the votes during campaigns. The candidate concentrates on the states with stiff competition. The electoral system allows candidates to ignore states that disagree or do not support the candidate.
According to the author, California, New York, New Jersey, Texas Illinois, and North Carolina are the non-competitive states and are the largest states in the nation. The candidate with most votes wins the election as it is in 48 states and the District of Columbia. The constitution or the founding fathers did not establish the system, but the allocation of the electoral votes is the responsibility of the state law. The author provides ample information to support his proposition. In the election of 2004, over two third of the presidential advertising and campaigns were concentrated on the states they with stiff competition. Ninety-nine percent of the advertising went to only 16 states while seven of the 11 most populous states and 99 percent of the list populous states remained as spectators. In the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000, the winning candidate won without most popular national wide votes. According to Koza, this is a shortcoming. In the past six decade, a shift in a diminutive number of votes, in about two nations, would have elected the losing candidate. In 2004, John Kerry would have won against Gorge Bush with a shift of sixty thousands of votes against Bush’s 3,500,000-vote lead nationwide.
The author argues further that, twelve of the 13 smallest states lacks in political competitiveness in the presidential election. This is despite the common argument that least populous states benefits fro...