Electoral geography and how the 2010 U.S. Census impacts the political geography of a region or state - Essay Example

According to Berg-Andersson (2011), there are numbers of states which won electoral votes due to population increase—which include Arizona (+1), Georgia (+1), Florida (+2), Nevada (+1), South Carolina (+1), Texas (+4), Utah (+1), and Washington (+1) (pp. 1). Although Al Gore won the popular vote, he did not win the electoral vote. Thusly, George Bush, Jr. was declared President of the United States due to a federal judge’s ruling in Florida. Bugh (2010) states, “The chaos of the 2000 result made the messiness of vote counting suddenly obvious to nonexperts…” (pp. 118). This result was inadvertently based on population, because even though Al Gore could have won several votes extra than George W.

Bush—Bush could still have won the electoral votes based on the fact that a large segment of the population could be accounted for having only a very few amount of people in a particular county. Ultimately, it was then upheld by the Supreme Court that, indeed, Florida’s federal judge had ruled correctly. There were appeals made, but they were not successful. In any case, some states, like Arizona and Texas, continue to grow due to the influx of immigrants from Mexico. Moreover, the Latino population in this states are going to explode, as cities all over the nation are seeing increases in the Latino population.

In Chicago alone, by 2020, it was estimated by one senior official that one out of every four citizens will be of Latino descent. According to Berg-Andersson (2011), there are also a number of states which lost electoral votes due to population decrease—which include Illinois (-1), Iowa (-1), Louisiana (-1), Massachusetts (-1), Michigan (-1), Missouri (-1), New Jersey (-1), New York (-2), Ohio (-2), and Pennsylvania (-1). Many people are moving out of the Midwest due to the fact that unions are no longer going to be given collective bargaining rights.

Also, according to Goudreau (2010), New York, Illinois, and Ohio (in that order) are the top three states where it is no longer economically feasible to live, and people are leaving in droves (pp. 1). Reapportionment is possible according to what happened in the 2010 census, thus leaving some constituents with less of a say in Presidential elections. According to Bennett (2006), “[One] proposal would have the size of the House revert to 435 after the 2010 census, but that would include one representative from the District and hence would also leave the electoral college with an odd number of members thereafter.” (pp. 92).

Presidential elections, obviously, should not be left to the hand of fate. It is widely-argued, and supported by most Americans, that the electoral college system is outdated and must go. According to Schmidt, Shelley, and Bardes (2009), “The most obvious proposal is to eliminate the electoral college system completely…” (pp. 339). There is a high possibility that Presidential elections could be determined by the population of one’s state rather than the popular vote, which makes absolutely no sense.

If one gets the votes, then ideally one should also win the election. After all, the electoral college may indeed vote against the will of the people for its designated area, based upon a preference for political party—