The Republicans have a problem with the electorate. There are at least two approaches to this problem.
One,
they can listen to Gov. Jindal R(LA) and quit being “the party of stupid.” That
might include getting some counseling for their candidates about how certain
expressions sound to minorities and women. They definitely need to
broaden their focus to all of their principal values (economic freedom,
individual responsibility, and equal opportunity) and quit sounding like their
only objective is to protect the money of rich people. I hope that they go this way.
There
is another approach involving the electoral college that is, I think, properly
called chicanery.
Recall
that the president is elected by the electoral college in which each state is
assigned a number of “electoral votes” which is equal to the number of members
of congress that that state has. Exactly
how the state assigns those electoral votes is entirely up to the state
legislature. Almost all of states vote
in the electoral college by using the winner take all system: the candidate who gets the MOST popular (people) votes in the state gets ALL of that
state’s electoral votes. Exceptions are Nebraska and Maine which use the “congressional district” method which allows 1
electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district and two for the
state at large. There is nothing inherently
wrong with supporting this latter system if you advocated it nationwide and across the
board.
Some folks find the winner take all system very
troublesome since – to look at two examples – in California the Dems are a lead
pipe synch to win the state (about 8 million to 5 million in 2012) which means
that those 3 million people in CA who voted for the Reps “totally lost their
vote” since all 55 electoral votes went to Obama. Why doesn’t CA use the congressional district
method? The reason is quite simple. If they did the Reps would win some votes in
some of those districts. The Dems
control the CA legislature and they are not about to give the Reps a shot at
those electoral votes. The exact
opposite holds true in Texas.
But what if the sentiment was not so one sided? What if you were in a swing state like say Pennsylvania
or Florida? If you could get the electoral
vote divided then you could be sure of getting some votes, but not all. Pennsylvania leans Dem, but now has a Rep
legislature. Last year (to late in the
game I thought) the Reps tried to change the rules on the electoral vote
of PA. They were stymied. They have a lot more time now and the
proposal is to try to change the rules in several key swing states. From looking at them the states meet two
conditions: They have Rep legislatures
and they are not solid Rep states. To
split a solid Rep state would increase the Democratic vote.
There are basically two proposals and one can find considerable detail on them at Electoral College Changes Would Pose Danger for Democrats.
One proposal is to cherry pick some states that have
Republican Legislatures and would be helpful to Reps (Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia and perhaps Florida). To use a temporary legislative majority to do
this is what seems to me to be quite inappropriate chicanery and also likely to
backfire on whoever tried it. If it
changed some future presidential election then the state’s majority would be
quite upset.
A fair and above board way to do it would be to
advocate the congressional district plan be used in every state. That would require a constitutional amendment
which would not likely pass. Other objections
will be listed in a post here soon on the congressional district method.
Finally, as people so often do when discussing
alternative methods of doing something, the author commits the stasis fallacy which is described here and here. He tells us that if the congressional
district plan had been in use nationwide in 2012, then Romney would have won
the election. This is not a valid
conclusion as will be explained in a day or two in the post on the congressional
district method.
If electoral votes in all States were allocated by congressional district it seems to me that the results would approach the results of a simple popular vote. My objection to using a popular vote to elect a president is the spectacle of a national recount (think Florida 2000 on a national scale).
ReplyDeleteUsing congressional districts to allocate electoral votes would obviate my national recount concerns.