In the letter from Susan Collins of Harmony supporting the antique Electoral College, she supports that system because she feels that there are masses of sparse rural population that do not have their needs and concerns addressed without the archaic Electoral College method of electing our president.

I find there is the reverse impact of the irrational effect that largely sparse, rich ranchers and farm populations have on the presidential election as they are highly influenced in voting by favorable farm trade barriers and a 3% to 9% income tax break (for high earners at $200,000 plus per year, that's $18,000 per year more in their pocket for eight years). Those impacts are both inflationary, but not recognized as such; both do seem to truly influence votes.

There is also a more serious reason to abandon the Electoral College system: in 48 of our 50 states, the actual Electoral College votes are all (100%) awarded to the candidate with the majority of that state's votes. Then the minority voters (up to 49%) find that their corresponding Electoral College votes are not just trashed, but they are even changed to support the candidate that these voters did not vote to support! This outcome's consequence is real election interference.

Ron Koch, Butler