The presidency should be filled by popular vote

I am writing in response to the letter by Douglas D. Mitchell defending the Electoral College (Sept. 19, “The Electoral College Shows the Sovereignty of the States”). I would begin by disagreeing with his contention that the Founding Fathers wanted “a union of states choosing the federal government’s chief executive.” In fact, since there was no radio or television, and newspapers were local, the Founding Fathers didn’t want an ill-informed public directly electing the president. (Slavery was also a vexing problem that contributed to the adoption of the Electoral College.)

Similarly, citizens were not permitted to elect the statewide position of senator. Mr. Mitchell adds confirmation to my point by mentioning that in 1913, the 17th Amendment changed the selection of senators from state legislatures to popular vote. By then, it had become a simple matter for the citizens of a state to be well informed as to the position and qualifications of the candidates, so the reform made sense. That is now also true for a national election.

As Mr. Mitchell points out, the president is chosen by a union of states. The representatives are chosen by the states, and the senators are chosen by the states. So we have no one in the federal government who is elected by a pure nationwide vote of the people. As the sole position that is chosen by an election of the entire country, the presidency should be filled by a vote of the people. Then, with members of Congress being elected by the states and the president elected by the people, the system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches would be strengthened.

Five times a candidate has won the popular vote and lost the election. That makes no sense and should not be allowed to continue. JOE LODGE

Bethel Park