Dear state senator,

There has been an ongoing conflict on the matter of the proper method to use when deciding on a president: use of the electoral college, or popular vote. I believe that this should be looked upon in greater concern than it currently is. Not only do many people question this arguement, but they feel uncomfortable by it too. I believe the electoral college should be taken away from the process. This is a more secure way of voting because the people of this nation feel as if whom ever they vote for may not actually be voted for by the electors. And this is, in no way, a good thing for the nation.

In the first place, the electoral college has its flaws, as anything would. But it's these flaws that the popular vote dosen't have that makes it a less valid way to decide something as important as presidency. The electoral college has a seemingly fair way of deciding such a thing. Each state is given a certain number of electors to represent its population (Ex. A small state such as Maryland would have less electors than California). It seems alright, until you realize how unfair it really is... In one way, though rare, the electors may switch outlooks, and end up voting for the opposite candidate than whom they were voted, in turn, to vote for. Some even choose at random who they will vote for, regardless of who they were supposed to choose. Which then leads to the unfair decision for however many people he or she represented.

Not only does it have the unfair use of electors, but it also is much more inprecise than popular voting methods. While the electoral college, in total, has only a couple hundred votes, it is less rational than the millions upon millions of people across the nation wanting to vote for whoever they wish with the use of the popular vote method. In '

The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong',

the author explains, in paragraphs 4 and 5, how in the case of a tie in the electoral vote, that "the Houses selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people." Meaning that no matter what the people think, the president shall be chosen for them. And this is not the right way to elect the person designated to run the country.

In my final point, as not to bore you with countless others, the use of popular vote has already surpassed the electoral college votes, as such in the case of Nixon vs Kennedy, but has not proven enough to win the election. How is that fair, on any level? It shows how most people voted for one candidate, but then have that candidate lose because of the electoral college. Is that not reason enough, to show that people wanted a certain person as president, but because of the electoral college, didnt get as they wanted nor deserved? Not only is it shown in basic reasoning, but it is also shown in the numbers. The electoral college is an unjust way to elect presidents.

I hope this is enough to change your view on the electoral college. It is not the fair way to let the people of this nation have the leader they want and and rightfully deserve. The use of popular vote is. It not only is a direct line of voting from the people, but all in all has a much fairer way to total the votes. A vote itself cannot possibly change from the point it is written to the point when it is accounted for, but an elector can. Don't allow this to happen the next term. And i speak for most of the people in the U.S. when i say, as Bob Dole did: Abolish the electoral college!    