Impact of the elimination of the electoral college

Impact of the Elimination of the Electoral College
The Electoral College system of voting was established in the Constitution of the United States to vote for the President and the Vice President. This was later amended in 1804. It is a system of voting where, according to Article 2, Section 1 Clause 2, each state is given electors equivalent to the members it has in the House of Representatives in addition to one elector for each of the two Senators (Burg 18). When voters elect Presidential candidates they are, by extension, instructing the electors from their state to vote in favor of the same candidate (Hewson 41). This system has, however, been criticized due to weighty reasons.
The abolition of the Electoral College system of voting would be better for the electoral landscape. The first reason is that this system leads to gross inequality in the issuance of campaign resources (LeVert 74). Larger states receive more funding for campaigns. Secondly, it is also on record that smaller states are accorded more electoral votes. This gives the notion that some states are more politically important than others. The minority are given a louder electoral voice than the majority. Wyoming has 3 votes with a population of 532, 668 citizens against 32 votes for Texas which has approximately 25 million people. Wyoming has an elector for every 177, 556 people, while Texas has one for every 715449. This shows unequal representation. It is clear that a majority of the population may endorse a candidate, but the Electoral College system deprives the larger population of the ability to decide their leadership (Burg 155).
This system also advocates for the two-party system. This closes up democratic space, while dividing the country along red and blue lines (Burg 109). It is important to note that other political parties exist in the US, but are not given the support given to the Republican and Democratic parties, despite having positive ideals for the American people.
Advocates for the electoral system have argued that this system spreads votes, preventing candidates from concentrating their campaigns in places with high population density. Another defense has been that the system allows the different states to determine and design their own voting regulations, and the freehand to change them whenever they see it necessary to do so. Another argument is that the system maintains political stability by supporting the two-party system (Hewson 88).
However, these arguments do not address the main issues that touch on the voters, like their freedom to vote for their choice for President and economic issues. For instance, the four decades of the embargo between the US and Cuba has denied farmers in the western states from selling their produce in Cuba. If the votes of the people in these states, where the embargo is unpopular, were considered by use of the popular vote, the embargo may not have lasted as long, meaning less economic losses for these states and the country at large.
The Electoral College system of voting has been seen to award victory to candidates who have lost the popular vote, like George W. Bush in the 2000 elections. This system goes contrary to democracy as stipulated in the constitution. Therefore it would be more beneficial to use the popular vote method over the Electoral College system. This is because every voter would have one vote (LeVert 34). In addition, candidates would have to visit all states, big or small, to get votes as every vote would count.
Works Cited
Bugh, Gary. Electoral College reform challenges and possibilities. Farnham, Surrey, England:
Ashgate Pub., 2010. Print.
Hewson, Martha S.. The Electoral College. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2002. Print.
LeVert, Suzanne. The Electoral college. New York: Franklin Watts, 2004. Print.