Opposition to the Electoral College: Are they solutions in search of a problem?

The presidential election is approaching, and soon the votes will be counted. But how will the final result be determined? We’ve been hearing one of the candidates making charges that the election is “rigged.” I’m going to ignore that charge, and deal with the confusion over how the final decision is officially made. This is our constitutionally established “Electoral College” process. This process is also being challenged, not in terms of integrity, but in terms of its overall philosophical intent.
The Founders had a cautious and skeptical view of human nature, and many of their decisions sought to protect the country from humanity’s “dark side.” Such was the case in their decision to have an “indirect” method of electing the President to protect against a tyrannical leader winning a majority of the voters. Their process created “another set of eyes”—the electors. This was all part of the Founders’ overall scheme to dilute the power of government through the use of separation of powers and checks and balances.
The process, summarized greatly, works like this. . . . The general electorate votes for a combined presidential and vice presidential “ticket.” Based on this result, on a state by state basis, “electors” are selected based on the popular vote of that state’s electorate. Each state has some flexibility to set its own rules as to the details of how its own process works. There are 538 electors to correspond numerically to: 435 members of the House, 100 Senators, and three representing the District of Columbia.
The Electoral College meets on a specified date to vote for a combined ticket. A simple majority of the 538 electors is required to be named the winner. If that majority isn’t achieved, the decision goes to the House of Representatives for a vote. The electors are pledged to a candidate, but have some flexibility to change their commitment if they feel the public has been manipulated into favoring a tyrannical candidate. Because of the Founders’ lack of confidence in human nature, they created this system to partially insulate the electorate from the final selection.
Recently, there have been movements afoot to do away with the Electoral College so that Presidents would be elected by direct popular vote. Some want to amend the Constitution, while others believe it can be accomplished merely by agreement between states regarding rules of operation for the Electoral College, without a formal Constitutional amendment process.
Before one takes a stand on this issue, I believe it’s important to understand and evaluate the original reasons why this curious system was set up. I understand and support the Founders in their overall attempt at separation of powers and checks and balances. In looking at results over the years, some of which I don’t favor, I believe the Founders’ wisdom outweighs the imperfect results that may occasionally occur in the Electoral College process.
That, in a nutshell, is the “electoral process.” I generally agree with it and believe that any attempts to find another process are really just “solutions in search of a problem.”