Do the events surrounding the election of 2000 justify changes to the electoral college? explain why you think it does or why you think it does not in a well-written paragraph with at least three reasons.

The events surrounding the Election of 2000 justify changes to the Electoral College because Bush had won more votes in larger states which shows how successful he was, Gore only got some votes from smaller states. The Electoral College not changing determines the president and other campaign runners to pay close attention to larger areas for votes. Receiving votes from larger states will diminish the votes from smaller states, therefore why the Electoral College can not change. Many people will disagree with these statements as they think, its unfair votes from larger states cancel out votes from smaller states, however it is correct and should not be disagreed upon. The Election of 2000 use a method called, "butterfly ballots" for voting, although this method was stressful, it worked very well.

the supreme court plays a big role in government. the constitution gives them ability to check the president and the congresses actions and dictate if their actions are allowed by the constitution or not.

hope this .

manifest functions are the recognized and intended consequences of any social pattern, while latent functions are those unrecognized and unintended consequences. to analyze the manifest functions of any social institution, we have to study its contribution to the continuation of a group, community, or society.