Final answer:
The fairness of the Electoral College system, which does not base the number of votes strictly on population, is a contentious issue. Small states may benefit disproportionately while larger states with more population may not see their full influence. Reforms like the National Popular Vote interstate compact are attempting to address these disparities.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question of whether the number of votes being based on population is fair to all states is deeply rooted in the debate surrounding the Electoral College system. The Electoral College does result in instances where states like California have a disproportionally large influence in terms of electoral votes compared to their population percentage. This system can result in a candidate winning the presidency without securing the majority of the popular vote, as the decision hin_ges on electoral votes.
Furthermore, the Electoral College tends to favor small states, where each vote has a greater impact on the distribution of electors, potentially leading to a less representative outcome. The Supreme Court's one-person-one-vote directive aims to ensure equal representation through districting, but action at the federal electoral level has not followed suit. While many Americans feel their vote does not count due to this system, it's important to note that the popular vote in each state dictates the Electoral College's choice.
Electoral reform proposals, such as the National Popular Vote movement, aim to circumvent the disparities of the Electoral College by pledging state electors to the winner of the national popular vote, provided a coalition representing 270 electoral votes agrees. However, this proposal does not alter the fundamental structure of the Electoral College, and it would effectively ensure that the outcome reflects the popular vote.