Welcome to another election year, where we as Americans exercise our precious right to have a say in who our leader for the next four years will be. However, the United States has a rather conspicuously odd method of conducting elections. This method, known as the Electoral College, may have made sense at the conception of the country, but 244 years later, it's time to seriously consider abolishing this fundamental part of the country's beginning.

The Electoral College is the ultimate body of electors in the United States and determines the outcomes of multiple elections including the presidential ones. It is established in the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section 1 as "a group of electors that vote for a presidential candidate based on the people they represent".

Simply put, because of the electoral system, citizens are actually voting for an elector who vows to vote for a specific candidate, rather than directly voting for that candidate. This system of electing puts the emphasis on winning electors and thus states, which has given way to the term "swing states"; those states in which a Republican or Democratic candidate could reasonably win.

Backtracking to 1776, the Electoral College was a perfect compromise to two major conundrums facing the founding fathers. The first was how the president would be picked. One side wanted congress to pick the President while the other wanted a completely democratic popular vote. The system of electors was formed as a compromise. The bigger problem was the implications of slavery. 40 percent of of the southern population at the time consisted of slaves who not vote. However, southern leaders wanted slaves to be counted for purposes of representation in congress (which consequently would have lead to more electors). This problem was solved by the infamous Three-Fifths Compromise, which said slaves only counted as 60 percent of a person for purposes of representation in Congress. Not only did the Compromise make sure that southern states did not have a surplus of congressional representation, but also prevented them from having more influence in elections as a result of an evil institution.

So why now should we abolish a solution that seemed like such a good idea? Well the obvious answer is in the question. The Electoral College was a brilliant idea in 1776. The hard truth staring us in the face today is that we just don't need it anymore for two main reasons:

The first is because it has become obvious that the Electoral College does not do what we thought it did, which was make every vote equal, but rather nullifies a multitude of them. According to the Constitution, the candidate that wins the most electoral votes in a particular state, wins every electoral vote from that state. A winner-take-all situation that puts heavy emphasis on states rather than the people. Now, if the country were one that was governed by the states, then the electoral system of elections would still be more than genius - it would be ideal. However, we are supposed to be a country governed by the people, and the electoral system undermines that principle by nullifying an immense amount of people. Thus, leaves the door open for a president to be elected without really being selected by the people - a result that has happened 5 times, only one of which (George W. Bush) has been re-elected while another is 2020 incumbent Donald Trump.

The second is because its formation was largely due to an issue that does not exist anymore: slavery. The underrated original beauty of the college is that it severely limited the influence of southern (slave) states and undercut their attempts to gain more representation on the basis of higher populations - even though the people that made up that surplus were people who were denied human rights, including the right to vote. Although the electoral system did do much good at the onset of the nation, who knows what would have happened had it not been for the formation of the college? Slavery isn't an issue anymore, making the purpose of the Electoral College outdated.

The extreme antithesis to the Electoral College is a pure democratic vote. Thanks to advances in technology, this is a viable, although not foolproof, option. Another option to consider would be to let the Senate choose the President, similar but not identical to the way things were run during the time of the Roman Empire. I like this method a lot because it puts pressure on Americans to vote during the midterms when we elect congressmen and women. Such a proposed senate election could be complimented by a popular vote, which would be weighed lighter than the Senate vote.

Whichever option may be the most productive, I have come to the conclusion that we need to think long and hard about abolishing the Electoral College because its purposes are outdated and it undermines a foundational principle of the United States being a country governed by the people by nullifying a large amount of votes.

But for now, do not feel as if your vote doesn't matter. Yours could be the critical vote that determines the outcome of the election in a swing-state, a term I hope goes away soon.