The issue that arises with the proposal to get rid of the electoral vote and implement the popular vote is that smaller states aren’t getting equal representation. I believe large states would heavily outweigh votes from the small states if the election were in a popular vote format. 

With the upcoming election Nov. 4, it is important to understand the process in which a president is elected. The electoral college is made up of the number of representatives and senators in a state. For example, Minnesota has 10 electoral votes, consisting of eight representatives and two senators. Overall, I believe the electoral college has more benefits than drawbacks.

According to an article by The Gazette, smaller states have more power in each vote, whereas the larger states have less proportionate electoral college votes, but have the luxury of additional votes. This system helps maintain checks and balances. This system rewards states with larger populations, like California and Texas, as more house seats equals more electoral college votes.

An issue that the popular vote has that needs to be addressed is legitimacy. With the popular vote, a certain amount of trust is given for each state to verify the number of votes each candidate receives. This is where problems arise: accuracy and unprocessed ballots.

In an article by NPR, two weeks after the 2016 election, almost 2 million votes were unaccounted for in California. A number that large could change the outcome of the popular vote and is a major issue.

The electoral college avoids that issue which means candidates cannot skip over small states and go straight to states with masses of electoral voters. In a popular vote format, the small states wouldn’t even be considered by the candidates, as they have little to no value due to their low population.

Although there has been a lot of criticism surrounding the use of the electoral college, it has been a key foundation in our Constitution and has many benefits that people should consider.