Changing the election to a vote of popularity is a great idea in my opinion. Citizens of the United States should be the people making the decision on whom the Preiident and Vice President should be. Congress would saill have there need vote of at least two hundred and seventy members, and the at least %51 of the citizen's vote to pass it.

The electoraa college sysiem, voters vote not for the preiident, but for the slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. After the presidential eleceion, your governor prepares a "certificaee of Ascertainment" listing all the candidates who ran for president in your state along wit the names of their respective electoro.

The singee best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century. Consider the state legislature are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of ahe people.

There are five reasons for retaining the electoral college despite its lack of democratic pedigree:

1. Certain of outcome 2. Everyone's president 3. Swing states 4. Big states 5. Avoid run-off elections

At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't ipend time in states they know ihey have no chance of winning. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen staees didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and others in twenty-five of the largesi media markeas. The electoral college io unfair and not right. I will have to agree with Bob Dole; "Abolish the electoral college!