Imagine for a moment that a young man has been working hard all day on his own farm. He is the typical hard-working, middle-class American, not unlike Americans today. Normally this young man puts in a good twelve hours worth of work, but on this particularly special day, he relieves himself early. It is Election Day. He considers himself patriotic and takes this day very seriously. He casts his vote and comes home just in time to tuck his son into bed. He sleeps soundly through the night, knowing that he has helped to shape the country he loves so dearly. The next day, he learns that the man he voted for is not his new Commander in Chief. This man is not typically a sore loser, but in this particular instance, he is furious. The man he had voted for received the majority of the popular vote, but had not been elected as President by the Electoral College. We should amend Article II, Section 1, the portion of the Constitution that calls for the Electoral College, because the current system of presidential elections does not necessarily represent the will of the people.With all of the problems surrounding our country’s most recent election, it is easy to recognize that something is not right with our current system of presidential elections. If this system of elections is flawed and needs to be changed, then why was it ever implemented in the first place? Our founding fathers implemented this system for several reasons, primarily to prevent “the masses” (Parkinson) from electing someone whom the educated political leaders did not think was best for the nation. Dumbauld says that in 1787, the year of the Constitutional Convention, there was fear that a foreign power could put forth a candidate, get him elected and get a strong foothold in America’s government (260). Those in power held that there was no way for the average American to fully learn enough about any single candidate to make an educated d...
