sample debate case: replacing the electoral college

Because we believe in the American people, we affirm today’s resolution, “Direct popular vote should replace electoral vote in presidential elections.”

Contention 1- The Electoral College over represents states with small populations.
Because the number of electoral votes of a state is equal to its number of United States congressmen, and all states have two senators regardless of their population, small states have more representation relative to their population than larger states. For instance, in Wyoming, each electoral vote represents 181,000 people, but in California, each electoral vote represents up to 615,000 people--making the vote of a Wyoming resident over three times more important. The value of a vote should be equal for every individual: one person, one vote.

Contention 2- Electoral College doesn’t focus on individual citizens of the country.

Sub Point A- The winner takes all system incorporated with the Electoral College is unfair.
In the electoral college, if a candidate receives 50.1% of the votes in California, then they get all 55 of those electoral votes. However, in that state, only 0.2% more people voted for that candidate, disregarding and discounting the voices and opinions of the 49.9% of the people. In the direct popular vote, those votes would actually mean something.

Sub Point B- Citizens are discouraged to vote because their vote might not count if their state already leans towards one party.
As a democratic society, it is important for the United States to encourage citizens to have a voice in the democratic process so that more people are satisfied with their government. It is a proven fact that when a voter knows his or her vote makes a difference, they are more encouraged to cast a ballot. According to Fairvote.org, in 2004, the presidential candidates mostly visited the different battleground states such as Michigan, Ohio and Florida and seven others, but basically neglected the other states. According to Nate Silver of the New York Times, “Relative to their number of electoral votes, turnout is about 25 percent higher in swing states than in Democratic or Republican base states.” This shows that because people know that their vote counts, they will vote. Because their votes matter directly, direct popular vote will lead to greater voter participation, resulting in a more effective government.

Contention 3- Elections determined by electoral vote are put in the hands of electors, who are not required to vote the same way as the majority of citizens in their state.
Electoral vote ultimately places the decision of who is elected president in a handful of electors rather than the country’s citizens. Electors are not required to vote fo
r the candidates they pledged to vote for. According to Fairvote.org, there have been over 150 faithless electors in the history of the Electoral College, and “21 states still do not require their members of the Electoral College to vote for their party’s designated candidate” and “the 29 states (including the District of Columbia), that do require faithfulness issue a small variety of rarely enforced punishments for faithless electors, including fines and misdemeanors.” In the 1836 election, Virginia’s 23 electors pledged to vote for Van Buren and his running mate, Richard M. Johnson. However, all 23 of them became faithless electors and did not vote for Johnson. This incident left Johnson one vote short of the 148-vote majority that required for him to get elected. In the end, the Senate had to make the decision of who would become the Vice President. There have been many incidents of faithless electors making an impact on an election and because many states don’t have punishments for this wrongdoing, this practice could continue to break down the legitimacy of the electoral system.

It's time for a change. To give power to the people, vote to replace the electoral college with a direct popular vote. Vote affirmative. Thank you.