“He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people.” Thomas Jefferson wrote these words to show the world the troubles King George put on the colonies. The key of this quote is that proper representation is pivotal to a proper government and to the nation they were founding.  In today’s modern world it seems like every four years people start to gripe about the Electoral College and how it limits their representation. With voting participation steadily declining in the last several years voters need to know how their votes matter now more than ever. They have to ask themselves is the Electoral College a proper voting system for the citizens of the United States of America? The answer: the current Electoral College has an important purpose that cannot be abolished.

The main problem that hurts the Electoral College is that many people don’t understand what its purpose is. To understand the Electoral College properly, you must understand the political ideals and principles of the time during it was created. James Madison stated in the preamble of the Constitution that the government is responsible to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,” as well as “Promote the general welfare”  and “Insure domestic tranquility.”  These principles show that the founders of our nation cared about our representation as a people, but more importantly cared about our safety and the common good for the country. It was for these reasons that the Electoral College was shaped the way it was. Michael Martin Uhlmann, a Professor of Government in the Department of Politics and Government at Claremont Graduate University, states that the Electoral College “teaches us that the character of a majority is more important than its size alone. Americans ought to care about whether the winner’s support is spread across a broad geographic area and a wide spectrum of interests. That is what enables presidents to govern more effectively.” Therefore, you must understand that the founding fathers wanted the president elect to be elected by a diverse group of religions, races, and political interests of people to help the leader be effective in their job and service as they would do what’s best for all the diverse groups instead of just a select demographic.

Another major purpose of the Electoral College is that it was supposed to support the two party system with a limited amount of candidates. Michael Uhlmann explains that “what the people would get by choosing direct election is the disintegration of the state-based two-party system; the rise of numerous factional parties based on region, class, ideology, or cult of personality; radicalized public opinion, frequent runoff elections, widespread electoral fraud, and centralized control of the electoral process; and, ultimately, unstable national government that veers between incompetence and tyrannical caprice.” The fear of the founders was that the best candidate would not be considered in a flood of people campaigning as well as the fact that a person could simply win an election with only twenty percent of support of the nation. The main purpose of the Electoral College was to provide a fair voting method to the diverse population that is America and to limit the chaos that comes with an election.

The annual four year protest of the Electoral College seems almost to be a tradition at this point. It seems like almost every election season people propose revisions and or a switch to a popular vote. A popular strategy that is nothing new but was definitely highlighted in the 2016 election is that of people campaigning to electors to speak their minds and vote for who they truly believe is the best candidate instead of voting for who their state elected them as. A petition for this very idea received over five million signatures this past election season. One Texas elector ended up casting his electoral vote for Hillary and did not vote for Trump, even though his state overwhelmingly supported the candidate (Timm). The problem with protests like this is that it ruins the idea of the Electoral College and voter participation. Many voters would lose interest in voting if they knew an elector’s vote could overrule the majority without some proper reason.

During our modern times many citizens find that the Electoral College is outdated and that we should have the ability to have a popular vote. It is a valid point, but we need to look at the result it could have on our nation. Leon Friedman, another notable Law Professor who works at the Dean School of Law, shows that “if the people voted directly for President, there is the probability that an election will “convulse the community with . . . extraordinary or violent movements.”’ That “rather “this detached and divided situation” outlined in the Constitution will be less likely to produce “heats and ferments.”’  Once again the founding fathers and our government are suppose to be protecting our safety and that a popular vote with a more grand scale winner take all system could lead to an unsafe country. Uhlmann adds to this by stating that “if all you care about is the achievement of mathematical equality in presidential elections, and if to achieve that goal you’re willing to eliminate the states’ role in presidential elections, what other “undemocratic” features of the Constitution are you also willing to destroy?” His point is simple when we start to look at the fact that the nation is a Democratic Republic and we want turn it into a straight democracy. Thomas Jefferson is famous for stating “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51 percent of the people may take away the rights of the other 49.” This is pivotal to our system and that is why we have a state’s vote separate from each other so that there is widespread support instead of the total country. Voters today need to understand that removing the Electoral College could result in removing the basic principles of Democratic Republic that our entire nation is founded.

Notably two states tackle their electoral votes in a different way than the winner takes all system in place by most states. Maine and Nebraska use the Congressional District Method. This method separates the state into districts based on the number of electoral votes each state has. In this way, they move the winner take all system to each district, which opens up the opportunity of states to have split electoral votes. This system has been in place since the 1950’s in Maine and 90’s in Nebraska. Usually electoral votes are never split and the first instance of this was in 2008 when of Nebraska’s votes went to Barack Obama and most recently when one of Maine’s votes went to Republican nominee Donald Trump. This system helps give representation that is more efficient. It is important to note that this process is within the states hands;/

Although very debated and hated, the Electoral College’s purpose is pivotal to our country’s foundation. The Electoral College system helps provide fair representation for multiple regions, religions, races, and more. It is a reminder of what roles our states play in our country as well as a beneficial reminder as to how the founding fathers helped form a country in which they could secure the right of representation for large districts of people.