You assumed correctly. History cannot prove why the electoral college was instigated definitely. Most believe it was indeed to protect small states but some scholars believe it came about for other reasons. Regardless, it was not federal law until 1845. Interestingly, in the beginning, each elector voted for two persons, with no designation for President or Vice President. The person receiving the greatest number of votes (as long as that number was a majority of the electors) would be President, while the individual who was in second place became the Vice President. In 1796 the President and Vice President actually came from separate political parties and in 1800 there was a tie (remember Burr and Jefferson?). Due to that problem, the 12th Amendment was passed. The electoral college number is based on the number of representatives and senators in the state. Many believe it was originally in place because most voters weren't smart enough to make informed decisions and then only MALE landowners over the age of 21 could vote. Electoral college members were selected by the state leadership, not the voters. In most states the electors can freely cast their votes for whomever they choose regardless of the selected candidate. When they vote against the voters then they are considered a faithless elector. It is a misdemeanor in most states but in some states it is a felony and is only typically done as a form of protest. In some states it is actually illegal but there is no penalty for it.



>I always assumed that the logic behind the Electoral College was that when the country was founded, communication was rather limited - and that they didn't really trust the average American to be able to make an educated choice because people simply would be unaware of the canidates & issues.
>Obviously times have changed now that we have TV, Radio, Internet, etc - so I've sorta felt that the Electoral College was just an outdated idea.
>
>>I would say so. Just look at the election of 2000 where Gore won the popular vote but lost the election. Bush lead the popular vote most of the evening until the west coast started adding greatly to Gores totals. Obviously the States Gore won were by wider popular vote margins than Bush margins in States that he won. So that is a good example of the need to appeal to a wide variety of voters whether they be from the northeast, west coast, midwest, or deep south. This is the part of the genious of the writers of our Constitution.
>>
>>>Ok, that makes some sense, but aren't the electoral votes per state based on population? Is it just a way of bringing everyone closer to the center of the bell curve? If so, then it's not necessarily a bad thing.