posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 09:37 AM
I'm cool with state legislatures changing the way the electoral college votes are split, I'm not a big fan at all of getting rid of the EC. I think
the EC is a brilliant. It allows states that don't have huge populations to be relevant in a Presidential election. If there were no electoral
college, candidates for President would only focus on large urban population centers.
I think if some states changed the way they allocate EC votes it would really mix up the dynamics of a national election. Instead of tallying up your
"owned" states your opponents "owned" states and then fighting over the close ones, you'd see money spent in places other than Florida, Ohio, and
other swing states.
I don't think you'd ever see something like this in Florida or Ohio though. I'm sure the media in those states just loves the money both parties
spend there every four years.
I've long been a proponent of splitting EC votes by congressional districts, with the statewide winner getting the two from the Senate, but I do
realize that gerrymandering by both parties is problematic with that. I think I like the plan in the OP a little better now though. It makes sense to
divide EC votes by percentage of popular vote and give the extra 2 to the one with the most votes. Either is much fairer than winner take all like is
done in 48 states now.
I do love the hyperbole from the OP though. The title implies that the GOP is attempting to do something illegal, when the Constitution plainly states
that how EC votes are allocated is the business of state legislatures. I think the reason neither party has really tried this before is that they are
fully aware that the current leanings of a state may change. It would be funny if allocations like this cost a party a Presidential election ten years
down the road.