Electoral college ensures all areas are represented

I read your Opinion page in Sunday's Daily Herald suggesting that we do away with the electoral college and I could not disagree with you more. The electoral college was established to ensure that even the least populated state would have a say in the outcome of a national presidential election.

It should be noted that since President Franklin Roosevelt was elected in the 1930s and prior to the election of Donald Trump, we had equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans occupy the White House. In all that time, the outcome of only two elections were determined by the electoral college. If we were to go to a popular vote only, the outcome of every election would be decided by New York & California. I know the liberals who are well represented by the Daily Herald would like nothing more than that to happen. What we would end up with is a one-party system, an end to democracy and either a socialistic or communist country.

If you are looking for ways to improve our national government, you should be pushing for "term limits" for members of Congress and the Senate, the same as we have for the president. For too many, it has become a lifetime job. On both sides of the aisle, there are too many who are not keeping up with the changing times and have become obstructionists.

There should also be a better way of appointing judges to the Supreme Court. Most decisions are voted along political lines and these appointments should not be lifetime positions. Term limits would also help on a state level. A good example is Illinois, where Madigan controls the state House. I often wonder why we bother to elect a governor.

Howard Huber

Mundelein