On April 30, 2019 Trent England delivered a speech at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C. titled The Danger of the Attacks on the Electoral College. One advantage of the Electoral College he mentions is “the Electoral College ensures that winning supermajorities in one region of the country is not sufficient to win the White House”. He questions with the popular vote “would it really be better if the path to the presidency primarily meant driving up the vote total in the deepest red or deepest blue states?” He also mentions that proponents of the popular vote fail to realize “what matters most about every legislative body, from our state legislatures to the House of Representatives and the Senate, is which party holds the majority. That party elects the leadership and sets the agenda. In none of these chambers does the aggregate popular vote determine who is in charge.” Another issue Mr. England alludes to is that implementation of the popular vote would probably result in more oversight by the federal government in conducting state elections of the POTUS. For close elections national recounts could be triggered with federal investigations of possible voting irregularities at all levels of voting districts. However, in my opinion the most important argument for maintaining the Elector College is to preserve one of the checks and balances incorporated in the Constitution to prevent tyranny of the rights of the minority by the majority.