Essay on We Still Need Affirmative Action - 512 Words

During the 1950’s and 1960’s there were major changes in civil rights taking place within the United States. In 1964 Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, which sought to create equal opportunity for minority groups in the nation and eliminate discrimination. Shortly thereafter, â€Å"the goal of the civil rights movement shifted from the traditional aim of equality of opportunity through nondiscrimination alone to affirmative action to establish ‘goals and timetables’ to achieve absolute equality between blacks and whites† (Dye 253). These goals and timetables were cemented with Executive Order No. 11246, issued by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965. This order is commonly referred to as the foundation for modern-day†¦show more content†¦Two centuries of severe racial oppression cannot be remedied by four decades of governmental policy. Public opinion also seems to support the effectiveness of affirmative action policies. In a 1999 p oll conducted by Newsweek, â€Å"both African Americans and whites say [that] affirmative action has improved conditions for blacks† (Race: Bills and Proposals). The effectiveness of affirmative action is also evident in employment demographics, as â€Å"there have been significant gains over the past 20 years in minority employment, even in traditionally segregated trades such as sheet metal and electrical work† (Race: Discussion Guides). Affirmative action programs have also played a major role in education, providing new opportunities that were once denied to minorities. Perhaps the most common argument against affirmative action comes from individuals who state that they had nothing to do with the oppression and hardships that were inflicted on minorities (particularly African Americans) in the past. However, these hardships were continued for years under our government’s rule, with very little action being taken. It is the responsibility of our governme nt to correct the injustices of the past and provide greater opportunities to future generations of the sufferers. It is also the responsibility of the majority to recognize the past and support the efforts of present and future programs, which may rid the nation ofShow MoreRelatedAn Ethical Dilemma: Affirmative Action, Do We Still Need It?1706 Words   |  7 PagesDilemma: Affirmative Action, Do We Still Need It? An Ethical Dilemma: Affirmative Action, Do We Still Need It? Abstract This paper discusses the importance of affirmative action in today’s society and the ethical role it plays when Employers and Universities are considering entry to their respected places of establishment. The paper will conclude with what America will face in the future in terms of affirmative action. An Ethical Dilemma: Affirmative Action, Do We Still Need It? Read MoreEssay on Affirmative Action and Racial Equality 1467 Words   |  6 Pages Affirmative Action and Racial Equality (1) Issue Identification Many individuals do not know the meaning of the term â€Å"affirmative action.† In order to clearly understand the issue, one must first know the necessary terms associated with it. Affirmative action is a term given to an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination (i.e. African Americans, Asians, etc.). For example, certain scholarships for African Americans can be regarded as affirmative action opportunitiesRead Moreaffirmative action1695 Words   |  7 Pagesï » ¿ Abstract What is affirmative action? Affirmative action is an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, esp. in relation to employment or education; positive discrimination. In the 1940s: President Roosevelt signed an order making discrimination illegal in defense contracting. 1954: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that separate but equal facilities on the basis of race were unconstitutionally discriminatory. The Act of 1964: CongressRead MoreAffirmative Action During The Civil Rights Movement1237 Words   |  5 Pageshappened until the government implemented affirmative action. Affirmative action allowed minorities more opportunities into schools and allowed more opportunities for jobs. It also allowed society to become more diverse with ethnicities and cultures. Affirmative action diluted the racism in the country and eventually helped everyone work collaboratively. Now that affirmative action has done its job, I feel that it is no l onger needed. Affirmative action was made to level the playing field betweenRead MoreAffirmative Action For African Americans1478 Words   |  6 PagesOliveira 1 Lucas Oliveira Ms. Alonso English 8 Honors 7 March 2015 Affirmative Action Have you ever wondered why all companies have employees of all races? Affirmative Action sought to give African Americans workers and minorities equal access to education and employment which was previously denied to them. It makes companies and schools give equal access to minorities. Affirmative Action is a topic that has been in government officials minds for a long time. Between 1870-1900, many African AmericansRead MoreAffirmative Action Policies Should Be Implemented891 Words   |  4 PagesAffirmative Action Policies Should be Implemented Affirmative action policies should be implemented to improve to help propel the company forward. Affirmative action can be a useful tool to help create diversity in the workplace. Implementing affirmative action policies will encourage growth in the company because we will be able to effectively select and hire people, not on the basis of race but on actual qualifications that make a person suitable for a position in the company. Affirmative actionRead MoreWhy We Still Need Affirmitive Action1493 Words   |  6 PagesWhy we still need affirmative action Because of the complex nature of the discussion on affirmative action and the controversies and the emotion surrounding it, it is imperative to first recap on the causes of race and inequality in the United States of America. The policies on affirmative action were proposed as a fractional remedy for the socio-economic impacts of past and present disadvantage faced by certain groups in the population, especially with regard to biases on gender and race. Such disadvantagesRead MoreAffirmative Action Should Not Be Legal1188 Words   |  5 PagesAffirmative action is stated as, â€Å"the encouragement of increased representation of women and minority-group members, especially in employment† (dictionary.com, 2015). Within our time and during most of the civil rights movement minority groups have always found it harder to secure more efficient and higher paying jobs due to racism, stereotypical people, and their behavior. With this being the cause to affirmative action congress ha d to put a law into effect to ensure that this would not continueRead MoreModule 6 - Original Assignment839 Words   |  4 Pagesculture, evaluate the contemporary strategy of affirmative action for minorities to bring about more fairness in hiring and promotion practices. Draw heavily from the assigned readings and then explain and defend your arguments concerning affirmative action and reverse discrimination. The fact that we are still talking about job discrimination, in the 21 century is really a sad thing. We have made amazing strides in all fields of science and medicine, we have the capability of having AI (artificialRead MoreAffirmative Action : What s The Right Thing?1320 Words   |  6 Pages2016 Final Paper – Arguing Against Affirmative Action Affirmative action is a rather complicated subject that is packed with nuance. It can be difficult to fully assess whether affirmative action is a good thing when discussing it in terms of what is just and what is unjust. Professor Michael J. Sandel argues in favor of affirmative action. However, the arguments he uses when presenting his case are not particularly strong. In the â€Å"Arguing Affirmative Action† section of his book, Justice: What’s

The Thing I Should Have Done free essay sample

June 16th 2010 was one of the saddest days I ever had. It was also the only day, as far as I can remember, the first time I cried. I got back home from Physics Regents content with my performance. I was getting ready to go out with my friends. But my father called me on my cell phone. I thought to myself ‘Why would he call me on my phone? We usually talk on Skype. And it’s 5 in the morning in Korea.’ I picked up. My dad spoke in firm but noticeably sad and teary voice. He told me grandfather just passed away few hours ago. I felt like sky collapsed. My grandfather has been severely ill for over 3 years with diabetes complications, dementia, and many other illnesses. He was so weak that he couldn’t even go to the bathroom or eat without my grandmother’s assistance. But I always had faith in myself that when I get back home, he’d be there waiting for me. We will write a custom essay sample on The Thing I Should Have Done or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page And I can make up for all those time I was away studying. The idea of him not being there just killed me. He was a strict old man. But he was always nicer to me and loved me the most, because I was his first grandson. After part of my family moved to U.S he developed severe amentia. My father and grandma told me whenever my father was at the hospital he’d ask for me; he forgot that I was in U.S. He wasn’t especially happy when my cousins visited him. He’d ask if they knew I was doing well and when I’m going to come see him. I only got to talk to him handful of times on the phone because he’d cry when he heard my voice. Sometimes he wouldn’t even speak. I should have gone to his funeral. I had volunteer activities and a summer course. But I really should have. I left my dad, the first son, who had the duty of taking care of the funeral, alone. As his first son, I was supposed to be there helping him. One of his good friends took over my job. I wasn’t there when he needed me. By the time I decided to go, it was too late. I felt horrible about not being able to see him and not being able to tell him how much I loved him. Most of all, I regret not being at his funeral. This taught me a valuable lesson. I should always listen to my heart and do what I think is right without hesitation. That way I won’t have any regrets. Also, I’m going to work hard and succeed. Up there in the heaven, my grandpa will see me and smile.

R v Hebert Case Analysis free essay sample

Neil Hebert was suspected of having robbed the Klondike Inn. After the police located Hebert, they placed him under arrest and informed him of his rights, and took him to the R. C. M. P detachment in Whitehorse. Hebert contacted counsel and obtained legal advice regarding his right to refuse to give a statement. After exercising his right to contact counsel, Hebert was interrogated by the police. During the interrogation, Hebert indicated that he did not desire to make a statement. In attempt to get information out of Hebert, the police placed him in a cell with an undercover officer. The officer was dressed in plain clothes and was posing as a suspect under arrest by the police. The undercover office proceeded to engage Hebert in a conversation, during which Hebert made several incriminating statements. This action violated ss. 7 and 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The judge excluded the statements made by Hebert to the undercover officer, and he was later acquitted of the charges. We will write a custom essay sample on R v Hebert Case Analysis or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page However, the Court of Appeal set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial, concluding that the police had not violated ss. 7 and/or 10(b) of the Charter. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, concluding that the police had violated neither Hebert’s right to counsel. For the court, the right to counsel did not disqualify the police from questioning the accused in the absence of counsel after counsel had been contacted. Furthermore, the court asserted that the right to remain silent, as a fundamental principle of justice, did not prohibit the accused being questioned by undercover police officers. As such, the court set aside Hebert’s acquittal and ordered a new trial. Hebert appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. Issues involved in the Appeal The Supreme Court of Canada considered two issues: First, whether the police had violated the accused Charter of Rights when obtaining the statements. Secondly, if in fact they did violate his rights, whether they should be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter. Under section 7, the state is not allowed to use its power to overrule the suspect’s will and reverse his choice to speak to the authority or remain silent. Therefore, the courts must adopt an approach to interrogation which emphasizes the right of the person detained to make a meaningful choice and which permits the rejection of statements, which have been obtained unfairly. There is nothing that prohibits the police from questioning an accused after they have retained counsel. Police persuasion does not breach the right to silence. In addition, the right only applies after detention. Thirdly, the right does not affect voluntary statements made to cell mates. Fourth, a distinction needs to be made between using undercover police to observe the accused and using undercover police to elicit information in violation to the accused right to remain silent. Last, even where there is violation of the suspects rights, the evidence, where permitted, may be admitted. Only when the court is satisfied with the possibility that its reception would be likely to bring the administration of justice into disrepute can the evidence be rejected under s. 24(2) of the Charter. Decision McLachlin writing for majority. Majority held that the evidence was inadmissible and upheld the trial judges ruling. Majority found that the right to silence was a principle of fundamental justice and as such was protected under section 7. An accused right cannot be undermined through acts of police trickery when being held in custody by police. However, if the accused were to reveal information to an informer or undercover agent of their own free will then the statements could be used against them. Majority concluded that: 1. Police violated the rights of the accused when obtaining the statements under section 7 of the Charter 2. The evidence should be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter. Ratio Decidendi Constitutional issue was whether the police had violated Hebert’s right to remain silent in process of obtaining information. Basic doctrines from the principals of fundamental justice were examined which involved (1) investigating common law rules (2) examining the Charter (3) examining the purpose of the right to remain silent. 1. Common Law Rules McLachlin concluded that there was a person whose right was at risk by the processes that occurred. Hebert had the right to choose whether to make a statement to the police or to remain silent. 2. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms The primary viewpoint of the Charter was the dominance of the rights and the fairness of the judicial system. Two related Charter rights complimented this case: the right to counsel under s. 10(b) and the right against self-incrimination under s. 11(c). In addition, as mentioned earlier, the right remain silent was an issue. Majority found that these rights granted Hebert right to be free of coercion by the police, but also the right to choose whether or not to give a statement. 3. Right to Remain Silent In this case, the court held that the right to silence was a principle of fundamental justice (core values within the justice system that must triumph over these rights for the good of society). Statements cannot be achieved through police deception and silence cannot be used to make facilitate any presumption of guilt; therefore, Hebert’s right was violated. Majority concluded that right to remain silent under s. 7 of the Charter guaranteed Hebert the right to decide whether to give a statement or not to the police. The right to decide whether to give a statement or not depended on the accused presence of an operating mind. It prohibits unfair conduct on behalf of the police. Lastly, the right to remain silent disqualified the statements that the police have obtained unjustly and in violation. Majority states that Heberts right to remain silent had been violated. Hebert had exercised his decision not to speak to the police. When he later spoke to the undercover officer, Hebert had not reversed this decision therefore being tricked by the police violated his rights. However, Majority said this right to silence was subject to limitations: i. Nothing that states that the police are prohibited from questioning Hebert in the absence of his lawyer after contacting his lawyer ii. Persuasion from the police was permissible up to the point of infringing upon Heberts’ rights or denying him of an â€Å"operating mind† (deception using undercover). iii. Right applies only after custody and does not allow undercover operations prior to detention. iv. The right does not affect statements made voluntarily by the accused to other cellmates. v. The right covers only deceptive activities by police where they attempt to get statements from the accused. It allows monitoring of the accused by the police or informants incase they overhear any voluntary statements made by the accused. vi. Statements obtained in violation of the right to remain silent would be excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter where admittance would bring the justice into disrepute. In addition, three factors where brought into discussion when determining whether the evidence should be excluded. 1. Effect of admission of evidence on the fairness: the admission of these statements would conclude the trial to be unfair. Hebert was tricked into making statements to the police after clearly stating he does not want to make any statements. 2. How serious the Charter violation would be: in this case, it would be quite serious because the police purposely were deceitful in order to gain knowledge. 3. Effect of the exclusion: exclusion of the evidence would result in an acquittal. Importance of the case for miscarriages of justice In this case the Supreme Court of Canada held that Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives individuals in custody the right to remain silent. It gives an individual the right to decide whether they would like to make statements to authorities or not. If the individual makes a statement, they should be fully aware that this statement might pose risk. Making statements without knowledge of future risk, and also after clearly stating that you would not like to make any statements to police, is evidence of procedural unfairness. â€Å"The right of silence, which has emerged at both the pre-trial and trial stages, is underpinned by the privilege against self incrimination, and the broader notions of the rule of law espoused by the liberal tradition. The consequence of this right proposes that one cannot be required to answer a question that might tend to expose oneself to criminal conviction† (Hocking and Manville, 2001, p. 65). Ensuring that no miscarriages of justice are attempted, such as wrongful convictions, it is necessary to abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for the collective agreement of equality among all. R v Hebert was in importance for miscarriages of justice because it ensures that individuals are not tricked into making incriminatory statements and ensures individuals are not coerced into confession where both may lead to wrongful convictions. Sherrin (2008) writes about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its relation to wrongful convictions. Sherrin (2008) states, â€Å"false confessions are a surprisingly frequent contributor to wrongful convictions, so a constitutional right not to speak to the authorities could help the innocent by allowing them to hide behind a protected veil of silence. † (p. 385). Often, the innocent will want to waive their right to remain silent because they want to make a clear case to authorities about their innocence. But also, there are those who exercise this right in order to not be a part of a miscarriage of justice which happen more than often in the current justice system. â€Å"False confessions seem to come about as a result of a critical combination of interrogative pressure and suspect vulnerability† (Sherrin, 2008, p. 388). Police are permitted to use interrogations to attempt to acquire information, and this often results in false confessions depending on the individual being accused. Therefore, it is of importance to understand that the right to remain silent encourages for one to remain silent in order to negate from incriminatory statements, in addition, it does not permit police to use deceitful or â€Å"trick† tactics, after your decision to remain silent, in order to attain information. In R v Hebert, the accused exercised his right to remain silent, yet authorities went forth with deception and tricked the accused into making various incriminatory statements. Using deception violates their right and excludes all statements as evidence. It is important because if these statements are the only evidence that would be used in trial, this can be a clear example of injustice and would lead to disrepute and power bias. â€Å"Whether an innate or acquired early in life, the desire to confess – to take responsibility for a perceived misdeed- is no doubt a deep seated impulse in all of us† (Stuart, 2008, preface). Stuart (2008) uses Miranda v Arizona as the stem to his discussion on right to remain silent. He goes on to claim that most Americans assume that once a suspect is in custody, they are most likely guilty (preface). Miranda v Arizona was a very important case that concluded that prosecution may not use statements that came from interrogation unless demonstrated that safe procedures were used to protect against self incrimination (Stuart, 2008). R v Hebert goes along this case in part due to the fact that the right to remain silent also protects one from self-incrimination. Ernesto Miranda was a illiterate man that had minimum, if any, knowledge about justice procedures, and therefore, was influenced to confession. Living in a country that accepts various of cultures every day, it is of great importance to ensure procedural fairness in order to limit possibility of false confessions and incriminating statements that can be used. As well, it is of great importance to communicate the rights individuals have when being detained. Being detained can invoke many different emotions and feelings, and can cause individuals to make statements they otherwise would have not. Even the smallest misstatement can be interpreted a completely different way that does not favor the person accused. In addition to the above, the right to remain silent also promotes the need for proof beyond a reasonable doubt and presumes innocence. Whilst banning torture and deceit, with this right, the prosecution needs to acquire evidence that will prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that this individual is guilty. Without the right to remain silent, incriminatory statements would be made, interpreted, and used to convict individuals that would in most cases be innocent. The right to remain silent is built on the presumption of innocence, requiring the prosecution to prove guilt. The allowance of various statements obtained by police would illustrate that the prosecution has failed to deliver the burden (Hocking and Manville, 2001). The possibility of planned incrimination where one is coerced on the outside to take blame for another also adds to the need for proof beyond a reasonable doubt from the prosecution. In conclusion, R v Hebert is of significance to miscarriages of justice because it is the stem that protects individuals from the coercive power that may lead to wrongful convictions. It protects individuals from being influences by interrogation tactics by authorities. In addition, it protects individuals from allows prosecution to utilize possibly incriminating statements as sole evidence for conviction – prosecution needs to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It also protects people that are not knowledgeable or can not communicate in certain languages from incriminating themselves. Individuals are also protected from the abuse of power by police in the possible use of trickery into obtaining information. Police goals are ones of wanting to lay charges and convictions, which can influence them to abuse their powers in order to achieve those goals. The violation of rights is unjust and can lead to wrongful convictions. Lastly, it protects police from interpreting statements in ways that can be incriminating. The right to remain silent allows for no interpretation, controls police power abuse, and strives for fairness throughout all processes.

Environmental resistance will determine how many humans the Earth can support Essays

Environmental resistance will determine how many humans the Earth can support Essays Environmental resistance will determine how many humans the Earth can support Paper Environmental resistance will determine how many humans the Earth can support Paper The above given statement suggests to me that the population of the planet that can be supported by the Earth is limited. As an individual, I view this statement as a guide and principle in living my life and creating a family. Continuous human consumption will provide us the energy that we need but this consumption is limited and is very much dependent on the amount of resources the Earth can provide. Some of my rules to live by will focus on â€Å"Sustainable Development†, â€Å"Sustainable Agriculture† and being â€Å"organic† in almost all aspects of living. Conserving and protecting the environment will increase the chances of the human race to survive for a long time. Concerns about nature and the planet should be the utmost priority. We don’t want to live our life inside a â€Å"Lonely† Planet. Human needs/wants should be the only consideration for the building of new roads, housing developments, golf courses, cities, etc. à ¼Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Industrialization and the progress of human civilization have brought in a lot of positive effects and negative effects. Decision making involving the destruction of some parts of nature and the construction of more human developments should always be given a second thought. Prioritizing industrialization over nature conservation is a big mistake. Although I understand that some sacrifices should be made for the advancement of the human race, I still strongly believe that decisions about industrialization should be critically evaluated and discussed. Pollution is okay if is controlled or minimized. I do believe that pollution is here to stay forever. For as long as there are humans living in this doomed planet then there will always be pollution. This realization will help us to do a lot of things in decreasing the presence of pollution. Since it is impossible to remove it, minimization of the harmful effects can be done if we manage our garbage properly. Industrial waste should be treated well and the following the idea of â€Å"Reduce, Reuse and Recycle† will greatly reduce the amount of pollution that we have. The greenhouse effect is not a big deal and probably temporary. Heating of our atmosphere is just one of the effects of destroying nature, increasing pollution and increasing industrial development. In my opinion, this only means that the greenhouse effect is only temporary. We can reduce or even eliminate its effects by doing a lot of recycling and conservation. The amount of carbon in our atmosphere is just one of the consequences of our own acts and the human’s discoveries. If we inculcate our children and people with strong moral and ethical values then we can expect a better management of the greenhouse effect and better conservation and protection of our planet. Quality of human life is measured only by housing and possessions. The above statement is 50% true for me. We will always live in this material world where we belong. Basic needs like food and shelter is a must. The quality of human life is mainly determined by the amount of â€Å"life supporting† things that you have. This includes food, housing, money, clothes and a lot more. But this only accounts for half. In my opinion, the quality of the individual himself determines the quality of life that he/she will have. Proper education, moral values, ethical values and the concern for other individuals will greatly dictate the decisions in life that he/she will have.

Air Force Aid Society essays

Air Force Aid Society essays 1. Imagine that the only vehicle in your family breaks down and you lack the means for repairs, what would you do? Did you know that there are services provided by the Air Force Aid Society (AFAS) that can help members with this kind of problem? If not, then you will be provided information on two ways that financial assistance is available in a situation of need. In the case of an emergency, you need to be aware of how and under what circumstance you can request and receive financial help. Also covered, will be an overview about the specifics on policies, grants, and loans to provide a clear understanding of how the program benefits members. We can now begin to take a closer view on policies associated with this system. 2. Policies provide information about the financial assistance program and also state eligibility requirements. First of all, you must be on active duty, retired, dependent, dependent of deceased Air Force personnel, or Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard personnel on extended duty (over thirty days), to be eligible for assistance. According to the AFAS assistance guide, financial assistance is given when a qualifying individual cannot otherwise pay for specific basic needs essential to continued personal effectiveness as an Air Force member. (2: - 7) This policy defines need and circumstance, which is on a case by case basis determined by a representative of the program. Polices also state that information concerning a member who has applied for help remains private unless a commander requests information in special conditions such as investigations or outstanding financial irresponsibility. Now that the basic policies have been explained, lets find out about grants. 3. A grant is money given without an obligation to pay it back as determined by an AFAS representative. Situations that qualify for grants are case by case. For limited fun ...

Movie review for Shattered Glass Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

For Shattered Glass - Movie Review Example As mentioned above, this film is about the real-life story of a journalist Stephen Glass, played by Hayden Christensen. At the start of the film, Glass in his 20s comes up with an entertaining story of a teenage hacker who is recruited by a software company, after or for hacking into their own computer system. However, when Glass fails to provide the relevant sources for that article, editor Charles Lane, played by Peter Sarsgaard, becomes suspicious. Then, when all his 41 published stories are investigated by the newspaper people, it is found out that Glass has completely or at least partially fabricated 27 of those articles. It is shown that Glass, without wanting to work hard and instead wanting to take a short cut to success, has came with these fabricated stories by concocting sources, supposed quotes, and even complete stories. However, when all his dubious actions were found out, he was fired and made to apologize along with his colleagues. The film clearly depicted the unethical activities of Glass and how it led to his downfall. From the beginning of the film, he is portrayed as a manipulative individual, who wishes to achieve fame through any means. A journalist duty comprises of going to the fields, studying the issues, interviewing all the connected persons, getting the official position, cross-checking the materials in hand, and then only writing the article. However, Glass due to his lazy nature and manipulative characteristic avoids fulfilling any of the above mentioned duties. Instead, he wrote articles from the confines of his office and home, by coming up with his own issues, by conducting fake interviews with concocted sources, and so on. Editors and other higher officials were also accused of journalistic dereliction because they missed cross-checking the stories of Glass, particularly his

Various Assignments Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Various Assignments - Essay Example Democracy typically requires that election systems result in proportional representation in that multi-party elections with a leader will typically mirror the concerns of the entire electorate (Smith, 2010). The US is split down the middle between two parties with precious few independent candidates interspersed at intervals. The US Presidential election itself often results in â€Å"winner takes all† outcome leaving those who did not elect the President feeling largely unrepresented (Smith, 2010, p. 135). This is the highest office in the US with both procedural and substantive defects. The procedural defects not only follow from the poorly administrative workings of the election process at the polls. The procedural defects also follow from the Electoral College. The Electoral College, informed by the popular vote, elects the President. However, by virtue of Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution, the Electoral College is not constitutionally obligated to elect a president consistent with the popular vote (US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 1). Therefore there is always a risk that the College Electorate may go against the popular vote and even if they did, there is no way for the population to know. This may account for the relatively low voter turnout at US Presidential elections as compared to other major government elections in other Western democracies (Smith, 2010). Therefore the US Presidential election process is by far the most flawed in that it does not allow for direct election by the voting public and in essence denies total or full representation. Moreover, the Presidential election campaign system is a long and complex exercise in which candidates engage in campaigns that typically involve â€Å"many twists and turns and seem to hinge on trivial incident and personal foibles† that are essentially meaningless in terms