Abolishing the Electoral College would undermine national unity

The Nov. 13 letter from TIffany Ballenger Floyd displays a lack of knowledge regarding the Constitution, the formation of the United States and our history.

When the colonies attempted to form what is now the United States, there was much concern about the new country being dominated by a few of the larger colonies. The solution was to construct the Constitution so that this issue could be addressed. The development of the Senate and the institution of the Electoral College were steps taken so that all states had significant influence in the new country.

Without these provisions, many of the colonies would not have ratified the Constitution. The same situation applies today. Factors that have made the United States the greatest country in the world for so many years flow from these early compromises: the separation of power between the judicial, executive and legislative branches; the Electoral College as the means to elect a president who will represent all states; and the creation of the Senate and the House.

It is imperative that all states retain the power to determine who is elected president. Without the Electoral College, it would be possible for fewer than six states to decide the presidency, leaving the other 44 states with no say in the matter. Would that reflect a group of “united states”?

Our system has worked well for more than 200 years at balancing the rights of individuals with the rights of states. Trying to change the system each time a candidate for whom we didn’t vote is elected would result in chaos. The president represents all states, not just the most populated states.