The most democratic country in the world (USA) has created a very strange electoral system. Distinguishes it from other college electors. In no other country on the planet is there a leader election system, which is held in two stages. If we recall that the United States, in fact, is a union, then the electoral college is a harmonious and justified phenomenon. Let's try to understand everything in detail.
The historical background of creating an electoral college
We often forget the fact that the United States is a union of states, each of which is, in fact, a separate state. They have their own laws, sometimes very different from each other. When work was underway on the US constitution, serious controversy caused the election of the president of the association. Some believed that it should be determined by universal direct vote; supporters of the resolution of this issue in Congress argued with them. The creators of the constitution in 1878 found a compromise formula. They proposed the creation of a special body, called it the "electoral college." Each state was given the opportunity to influence the choice of president. The fact is that the United States consists of different countries in terms of area and population. With direct voting, a clear advantage is given to those states in which more citizens live. Sparsely populated territories, in general, in this case do not affect the choice of the head of the country. And it was considered unfair. That is, the electoral college is called upon to equalize the chances of the population of each state to be heard. Now the opinion of each citizen is taken into account in the process of determining the president of the United States.
Who are electors?
The two largest parties nominate candidates for president. In each state, the functionaries of these political organizations form a list of people who will represent state education on a common plebiscite. The electors select public figures, famous people and businessmen. Often, parties include on their list those close to the candidate. At the time of the popular vote, there are two lists with electors. They will receive rights from the state after the approval of the list by the governor. This official is required to sign the proposal of the party whose candidate won the popular vote. If an independent candidate for the presidency comes forward, the list is formed in the manner prescribed by state law. By the way, there are no special restrictions on electoral candidates. You must have a US citizen passport, be loyal to a particular party.
College Representation
The number of electors from each part of the United States is equal to the representation in Congress. And this, in turn, is determined in proportion to the number of people living in the state. For example, California is the most densely populated area. From her, fifty-five people are included in the college, as many as they elect in Congress. In turn, the US parliament is bipartisan. Each state has two seats in the Senate, and fifty-three in the California House of Representatives. The number of state delegates in this part of Congress is determined in proportion to the population. Thus, the electoral college is a special body created to determine the US president for the next term. The people in its composition work only one day. Their work is not officially paid. The party independently determines how to reward its representatives.
US Presidential Electoral College: Rules
In a popular vote, the states determine the candidate for the highest position in the country. But the person formally winning this stage is not recognized by the president. For example, this was when Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump fought. The electoral college could cancel the result of the popular vote, theoretically. Supporters of the Democrats have taken a lot of effort for this. The fact is that there is no law obliging electors to fulfill the will of the people. They receive the order from the state determined by voting, but they themselves can express any opinion. There were such precedents in the history of the country, but they did not affect the election results. People voting against the people during the board are called "unscrupulous electors." For example, in 2000 a representative of the District of Columbia passed an empty ballot, although he was required to include Al Gore in it. All states except Maine and Nebraska cast their votes for the winning candidate. The indicated territorial entities distribute them in proportion to the results of the will of the people.
US Electoral College: Voting Process
The organ meeting itself is held on the forty-first day after the first Monday of November, when a popular vote is held. The electoral college is not coming together. Each state organizes the voting of its representatives separately. The results are immediately published. Voting by the electoral college is secret. Each member of the representative body is required to fill out two ballots, they include the names of candidates for the posts of president and vice president. To win, a simple majority of the votes is enough, now they need to get more than 270. The whole country monitors the voting. For example, the electoral college in the USA (2016) worked in very difficult conditions. State representatives were pressured by ordinary citizens who did not want to come to terms with the victory of Donald Trump. They received calls, sent letters with threats. Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton had more “unscrupulous electors”, which surprised the public. Before the board meeting, there were no reports of pressure on its members from the opposite side (Trump fans).
Punishment for dishonesty
Electors are appointed by the state, and these people are responsible to him. By the way, control is carried out immediately after the vote. The ballots are taken out for counting and see how the elected representatives of the people worked. In 28 states, as well as the District of Columbia, a law has been passed according to which unscrupulous electors are fined for a ridiculous amount of one thousand dollars. In the rest of the United States, no penalties are provided. By the way, the facts of the application of these laws are also not recorded. In fact, electors have the opportunity to vote at their discretion, without risking anything.
Exceptional Cases
Legislators have envisaged situations where the board cannot determine the president. This happens if the candidates get the same number of votes. This happened in 1800. Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Barr fought for the power leader’s chair. When the US presidential election took place, the electoral college was divided in half, none of the candidates gained a majority. In such situations, the matter is transferred to the House of Representatives. This body decides by voting who to give the presidency for the next four years. The House of Representatives participated in the election of the head of the country in 1824. Four candidates fought for the chair. None succeeded in securing the majority of the electoral college. I had to work the House of Representatives. The president was John Quincy Adams. Interestingly, according to the results of the popular will, he turned out to have the least votes.
Criticism of the system
The United States is constantly discussing the introduction of direct presidential elections. An argument for this was previously considered a historical fact demonstrating the injustice of the system. So, in 1876, the vote of the electoral college in the United States led to the election of Rutherford Hayes. However, his opponent gained more votes in the course of the popular will. It turns out that the opinion of the country's citizens was not taken into account at the second stage of the election. The second case has occurred in our time. According to the American media, in 2016, Hillary Clinton supported several million people more than her rival from the Republicans. But the president for the next cadence is Donald Trump. The two-stage process of expression of will is quite actively criticized in society. For America, it is important that every citizen is heard, and the electoral college does not contribute to the equality of state rights. Thus, sparsely populated territories are more significant than large urban agglomerations, since they have the same representation. In addition, candidates have to adjust their campaign to this system. They are forced to work more in the "wavering" states, since there is a better chance of getting votes than in the territorial formations that traditionally support a single party.
