The Electoral College could easily lead to the election of a President that does not have the popular support of the entire nation (Amar pp). Moreover, many believe that the clauses of the U.S. Constitution that provide for the electoral system should be removed before the country elects a candidate despite the fact that another candidate received more votes (Amar pp). Today, technology allows for an informed national electorate as

Electoral College When the constitution of United States was framed there were discussions on various methods of selecting the President and the method of a direct popular vote was rejected. The reasons for rejection were the poor state of communications and the large distances in between the states. This was felt to make the voters really be familiar with the candidates from their own states and this might lead to the

Electoral College The current function of the Electoral College is that each state has a set number of votes for the President, based on the population of that state. The candidate with the most votes in that state would receive all of that state's Electoral College votes. The system has come under fire from critics would point out the flaws in this system. For example, it does not differentiate between a

Electoral College: Should the U.S. Push for Reform or Elimination? When citizens of the United States vote in a presidential election, many believe that they are taking part in a direct election of the president (Sutin 2003). However, because of the existence of the electoral college, established in the U.S. Constitution, this is not really true. The electoral college is a set group of "electors" who are nominated by political activists and

Supporters of the current system claim it allows small states and small town America to have a say in the election. The candidates go to every corner of the battleground states and many people get the opportunity to meet and question them. Many feel that is a major benefit of the Electoral College. Another benefit many see is that it gives the winning candidate the majority of the vote.

This is just as important as having a president who is equally representative of the interests of each state. The Founding Fathers succeeded admirably in the area of state-based election of the president, but did they succeed in also ensuring we have a democratically elected president? Are public presidential elections really shams, leaving us with a president who is essentially appointed by political party favorites, or does he represent