Elections

When it comes to electing the President of the United States, the system could be improved by eliminating government contributions to campaigns, removing the electoral college, and shortening the primary season.

During elections, I believe candidates should be funded by external contributors and their own fundraising rather than by the federal government. This way, candidates can use as much money as they want. Money allows them to reach a greater extent of the American people. This is the problem with government funding; it sets limits to campaigning. The other problem is that this money comes from tax payers and a government already carrying a massive debt.

Also, the election system could be improved by removing the electoral college. The president should be elected by popular vote. With the electoral college, this is not always the case. For example, the Al Gore and George Bush election of 2000 is a testament to this. Al Gore won a greater percentage of votes than Bush (50,999,897 to 50,456,002). However, the system of the electoral college placed Bush into office which illustrates how the system can fail to reflect the views of the American people.

Finally, shortening the primary season may lead to more effect campaigns. For example, in the most recent Republican primary, there were multiple candidates that campaigned through the long haul. Narrowing down the nominee, Mitt Romney, has lasted almost until the Republican Convention. Because of this, the Republican party has not been unified or focused on a clear message. By shortening the primary season and choosing a nominee earlier, political parties can better focus their campaign and clearly project a message to the American people so that they are educated in casting their vote in November.