east one electoral vote and the presidential candidate would be awarded electoral votes form that state based upon districts won. This idea could help insure that smaller states would not be overshadowed by larger industrial states by splitting the larger states electoral votes between the candidates. This proposal is seen as an inaccurate way of allocating a state’s electoral votes and is a threat to the two party system (Grolier).The third proposal is a more accurate way of distributing a state’s electoral votes. Electoral votes in each state would be given to the candidates based upon the percentage of votes each candidate received. This proposal brings about the sharpest controversy. This system could weaken the two party system. By changing the allocation of electoral votes to this system, the door open for third party candidates to snatch up electoral votes in states they enjoy popularity. In allowing the door to open up for third party candidates an absolute majority would not be guaranteed in the presidential election. If a majority was not able to be reached then the House of Representatives would decide the presidential election and the senate would decide the vice presidential election. This would be the worst-case scenario in the views of many people. If the election were thrown to Congress then it would be possible for the president and the vice president to be from two different political parties. Having a president and vice president from two different political parties could stymie the executive branch and cause almost nothing to be accomplished (Grolier). All the proposed changes to the Electoral College solve one problem with the system but at the same time create another. The direct election by the people causes the influence of the smaller states to decrease and the possibility of a president being elected with only a small percentage of the popular vote because of third party candidates. Th...
