Essay № 1: A Defense of the Electoral College


The Electoral College is arguably one of the most complicated and intricate networks described within our Constitution. It extends a pathway to the White House, with exactly two-hundred and seventy votes needed to form a government that functions exactly the way it was ambiguously intended to; for after every four years, we are never without a sitting and acting president.

The purpose, functionality, and intricacies of this institution have been tainted with reputable arguments that suggest that it does not accurately reflect the will of the American people, or for all intents and purposes, the national popular vote. The United States of America is two-hundred and thirty-eight years old, and within those two-hundred thirty-eight years, we have successfully elected forty-five presidents. Forty-five presidents who have been elected democratically, and in the exact way in which our framers intended them to be elected.

The United States of America holds the record of enacting the oldest and longest living constitution in recorded history. The network of clauses and paragraphs that were carefully constructed by our framers envisioned a government that was far from perfect but one that was constantly being perfected. Yet, two principles within our grand experiment have allowed our Constitution to prevail. Those are that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the Electoral College will ultimately choose the President of the United States of America.

In order to ascertain the real character of our grand experiment, we must recognize that the establishment of a government and its constitution are not done nationally but rather they are implemented through a federal act. The inherent and distinct difference between an act that is willed nationally and federally is the basic foundation that gives the electoral college merit and a sound role in upholding the prevailing authority of our Constitution to be forever adapting to the current atmosphere and changes in our nation. Allowing for our Democratic Republic to survive as long as it has.

Our selection of a president is found in the understanding in which the way our Constitution was ratified. The Electoral College insists on the foundation of distinct coequal societies that elect a president based on a state’s atmospheric political character rather than an assembly that perpetuates a tyranny of the majority. The Constitution was ratified by a series of delegates that reflected the political charisma of the state in which they coequally existed in. A president is elected through a series of delegates that reflect the political charisma of the state in which they too coequally exist in.

It is under this principle that not only allows for the Constitution of the United States to withstand challenges that have strained its’ principles for two-hundred and thirty-eight years, but also allows for our government to consistently, successfully and seamlessly elect a president. As Alexander Hamilton says of the electors in Federalist №68:

“Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias.”

A sinister bias that both reflects the tyranny of any given majority and calls for the absence of any given corrupting inquiries within the immediate election; acting as the final bulwark between citizenship and eminent power.

For I do not wish to defend the current practice of the electoral college, rather the theory and purpose of its institution are to be defended. In a nation where national political personality is measured in coequal societies rather than aggregate numbers, we must stand steadfast and accept the institution’s ability to protect the very fabrics in which the Constitution is propositioned. For it is not the electoral college that was infallible in the 2016 election, it was the way in which we choose our electors and taint the power granted to them in the Constitution; to choose a candidate that reflects the principles outlined in our governing document, regardless of your state’s personality.