Dear Florida Senator,

There is a major problem in how we elect presidents. The Electorial College has to be replaced with a direct election because of how misrepresented many voters are, and how a canidate could lose the majority vote and yet still win the election.

The first problem of the Electoral College is that everyone is not represented. According to Bradford Plumer in paragraph 10, "... voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president...  Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always. Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong canadate? Sometimes." and because the voters cannot directly control who they vote for, the electors could choosing a different person than who they said they would, which means that the voters are misrepresented. Another way that voters can become misrepresented is because of confusion. Since voters sometimes get confused about who the electors are voting for, they could end up voting for the wrong person. Also, the Office of the Federal Register states in paragraph 7 "Most states have a 'winner-take-all' system that awards all electors to the winning presidential canadate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of 'proportional representation'". Due to the "winner-take-all" system, many people are not represented in the electorial votes, especially in large, one sided-states. As a result of this, many of the minorities do not even vote becuase they know that their vote will not win the state.

Another reason that the Electorial College should be replaced with a direct vote is because of how the majority does not get the canadate they chose. In paragraph 16, Richard A. Posner states that "It happened in 2000, when Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes, but that was the firs time since 1888." and because of the fact that the electoral votes are the deciding factor in choosing a president and not the majority, most of America did not get who they wanted to see as their leader and president. Even though this hardly ever occurs, it still hasto be fixed. As a result, Bradford Plumer states in paragraph 9, that "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." which would be a true democracy, unlike the Eectoral College. The Electoral College also has an even number of people in it, which means there could be a tie. However, the Electoral College "requires a presidential candidate to have transregional appeal" according to Richard A. Posner in paragraph 19. This is not a good thing because when a certain state or region is struggling, a transregional president will not focus their attention on that area of weakness. In a direct democracy, the voters could vote for a president that has an area of expertise in that region or state and could give them a much needed boost, leading to less weaknesses and an all-around better country.

To summarize this completely, the Electoral College has to go. It is unfair, misrepresentful, and is not even a democracy. Eventualy, it has to change. The question is, when is the government going to become on the same page with it's citizens and take the next step?