Dear Senator,

Some agree and some disagree about it. The Electoral College is a process, not a place. I am one of those people who agree with it because it avoids run-off elections and because of the big states populatons.

I agree in what the third source said: "the electoral college avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast." for example Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43% plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College (301 and 370 electoral votes, respectively)." So the way i see it is its kind of a back up plan. To ensure others that there will be something there just in case popular votes or what not doesn't work as planned or correctly.

I also agree with what is said in the third source about evening out the larger states compared to the smaller ones. For example, "The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that larger states (by population) lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the constitution..." The reason why i agree to this is because since the state is larger then others, there are more people there, so therefore when they do vote the popular vote will be larger than the smaller states. So the Electoral College equals things out.

Run-offs are avoided and big states compared to smaller ones are equals, that is why I agree with keeping the Electoral College the same. I mean it was made like it is for a reason. Why do others want to change something if there are very good and valid reasons for why its already being the way it is.

Sincerly.