The Electoral College Allows Minority Rule
The bedrock principle upon which the America was founded is that legitimate government must have the consent of the governed. In practice and in theory, this means that the majority rules while respecting the rights of the minority. The Electoral College turns that idea on its head, creating a system where the minority can rule.

In the 2000 presidential election, although half a million more Americans voted for Al Gore than did for George Bush, Bush won the Electoral College 271 to 266, granting him the presidency. In 1824, 1876, and 1888 the candidate who lost the popular vote won the presidency. In 2004, before provisional ballots were counted, a change of a mere 21,575 votes from Bush to Kerry in three states - Iowa, New Mexico, and Nevada - would have resulted in a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College, assuming that all electors voted for the candidate whom they were chosen to represent. This tie would have occurred despite Bush's winning margin of over three and a half million votes in the popular election.

Regardless of where they live or what they think, the minority should not have the right to dictate to the majority who the leader of our country is to be. And yet, the Electoral College offers them just that.

Swing States Matter, but What About the Rest of Us?
Because states matter more than people, the Electoral College encourages presidential candidates to focus on just 10-15 battleground states where the voters are somewhat equally divided in their choice of candidates. These swing states are up for grabs, so candidates spend most of their time, money, and attention there. States where voters are more like-minded either get taken for granted or written off as lost causes, neither of which does democracy any good.

TV viewers in Toledo, Ohio have been treated to some 14,273 ads promoting or attacking President Bush and John Kerry. But most of us have seen no broadcast TV ads for either. According to one recent survey, the top 50 TV markets where candidates are spending 87% of their money contain only 27% of the electorate.

We all lose when races are so heavily lopsided that candidates write off a state. Voters in safe states see little need to go to the polls knowing all of their state's electoral votes will almost surely go to one favored candidate.

Further, we all benefit from hearing the arguments of the opposing side, but that doesn't happen when candidates give up on a state. The slicing of American into red states that vote Republican and blue states that vote Democratic only deepens political polarization.

Americans are Ready to Move Beyond this Outdated form of Elections
At a time when there were no national newspapers, no TV or radio, most people were illiterate, and the idea of holding elections at all was considered revolutionary, the electoral college made some sense. The founders of our constitution came up with the Electoral College to deal with real world technical difficulties in holding a national election, as well as part of a political compromise to get the Constitution approved.

Those days are long gone. If Afghanistan can pull off direct election of their president, so can America. After 200 years we're more than ready to graduate to a true democracy and abolish the Electoral College.