When the Constitution of the United States was written our founding fathers decided on an Electoral College as the way to ellect the president instead of a direct vote. The Electoral College is a process that makes a compromise between the popular vote of the citizens and the Congressional vote. When citizens vote for president they are actually voting for a member of the Electoral College that is going to select their president, rather than the citizens voting for the president themselves. The Electoral College is made of 538 electors, the number of electors from each state varies depending on the states Congressional delegation. Washington D.C. is counted as a state for this process and alloted only three electors. The electoral college should be kept in use because it simplifies the outcome and allocates more power to the larger states.

The Electoral College should continue being used in today's government as a form of selecting the president because it simplifies the outcome of the vote. When voting with a popular vote system a debate over the outcome of the vote is very likely and will probably cause some constroversy. When the votes form the electoral college are counted the margin of victory is much higher which simplifies the result of the poll. During the election of 2012 Obama only recieved 51.3 percent of the vote, however he won the vote of the electoral college with an astounding 61.7 percent, a increase in the margin of victory by 10.4 percent. With this wide of a margin of victory a dispute over the victor of the presidential election is unlikely and  almost impossible to argue against. Some might argue that the Electoral College is flawed because electors can choose not to vote for their canidate. It is true that this has happened in the past, "in 1960, segregationist in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded on replacing the Democratc electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy." P.11. If this happened the popular vote for Kennedy would have gone to his adversaries instead. It is true that electors can choose not to vote for the canidate they pledged to and that this has happened in the past however the electors rarely betray their party's nominee and a tie in the electoral vote is extreamly unelikely.

Additionally, the Electoral College sould be kept in today's democracy because is allocates power to the larger states. It only makes sense that the larger states with a larger population should get more of a say in their government, and recieve more electoral votes than a small state with fewer people. With this system political infulence is restored to the larger states making the canidates focuss on the more populous areas. More power to the more populous states also means that run-off elections are avoided. In 1992 and in 1968 run-off elections were avoided due to the use of the Electoral College; "Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority of the Electoral College" P.22. A run-off election extreamly complicates the election process however the chance of this happening is greatly reduced when using the Electoral College which almost always produces a clear winner.

The electoral college should be kept in use because it simplifies the outcome and allocates more power to the larger states. The Electoral College avoids the outcome of a run-off election. It also greatly reduces the chance of a dispute between the victor. Most people do not like the Electoral College because they are not directly voting for their canidate however many people fail to realize hat it is rare for an elector to betray his nominee. Electors rarely betray their canidate because they are chosen by the canidates party or the canidate themself. The Electoral College gives political weight to states and is very useful in deciding the new president with no debates over who won.