Open thread: Electoral College reform

// Published January 17, 2006
On December 22, we blogged:

Then there's our Electoral College. What could be simpler? You vote for someone else to vote for the President. Maybe he'll vote the way you want him to; maybe he won't. Maybe the candidates will tie (despite being a million votes apart) and the House gets to choose. Or the Supreme Court. Maybe the guy with fewer votes wins the election. Maybe you live in Montana and your vote is worth more than your sister's who lives in New York. Maybe your state is so "red" or "blue" that no candidate cares enough to stop by.

What's the best way to correct the Electoral College's consistent and potential distortions of the popular will?

Discuss.

Comment on Open thread: Electoral College reform

Current Discussion

  • What are "the limitations of a system in which the winner is determined entirely by popular vote" and "the benefits of having the electoral college"?

    Posted by Nathan Larson, 2006-10-19 19:32:59 (6 years ago)

  • "The Popular State" - A new proposal to reform the electoral college I propose a system where the states that have a large number of electoral votes allocate 1 electoral vote each (from its existing number of electoral votes) to the "Popular State". The winner of the overall country-wide popular vote wins the "Popular State". For example: California will allocate 1 out of its 55 electoral votes to the winner of the overall popular vote. If the other large states(say 15 of them like NY, TX, MA, NJ, GA, IL, SC, MO, NC, VI, WA, MI, TN, AZ)(and I excluding "battelground" states here) do the same thing, then the winner of the overall popular votes gets around 15 more electoral votes. Hence it would be almost impossible to win the election without winning the popular vote. The other benefits of this system are: 1) It does not require any constitutional amendment as it does not change the existing number of electoral votes awarded to each state. 2) It forces the candidates to run a national campaign. 3) It will also not require the smaller states to give up any power. 4) It also does not have the limitations of a system in which the winner is determined entirely by popular vote. 5) It preserves the benefits of having the electoral college and eliminates the drawbacks it has. I have also written to the Senators of California - Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer, Senator Clinton of New York and California Assebmlywoman Sally Lieber to explore this idea. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks a lot. Arun.

    Posted by jayen, 2006-01-19 19:30:55 (6 years ago)