From The Hill we have this report on former Vice President Al Gore wanting to abolish the Electoral College and go with the popular vote.
The fact that it is Vice President Al Gore makes me dubious. What makes me more dubious is that he is suggesting a work-around in terms of a compact amongst the various States to achieve this—a sort of Constitutional end run. I wonder what Tipper thinks?
Frankly, I am in favor of individual States splitting their Electoral College votes, based upon how voters within that State split. For example, if the Voters in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts went 65% for President Obama and 35% for Governor Romney, President Obama would get 7 of our Electoral Votes and Governor Romney 4. As I recall, two states already do this.
I do have what I call the "Kad Barma Variant". If Massachusetts has roughly 4 million voters and 45% of them actually vote, then 6 Electors would be pledged to vote "None of the Above" (President Obama getting 3 and Governor Romney getting 2). The idea is that if no Candidate gets the required 270 Electoral votes the election is re-run.
The only problem with the Variant is that it assumes those who didn't vote disliked both Candidates, as opposed to the possibility that they were just truly indifferent to the choice—they could accept either with equanimity. Otherwise why wouldn't they vote for some third part candidate? And, if it caught on, think what it would do to State and Local Government.
Regards — Cliff
2 comments:
I like the idea of prorating each state's EC total based on % of voter turnout. This might snub wingnut efforts to surpress voter participation.
Something should be done to encourage the dominant parties to welcome new voters to elections. Now they tend to fish where the fish are.
Fascinating hypothetical. It would mean that my Presidential vote in Massachusetts would matter. Currently, it does not -- and that would be just as true if I were registered as a "D."
And yes, I think it's too broad an assumption to think that non-voting is a principled act on the part of (most) of the non-voters. I'm not casting aspersions on the non-voters -- it's their freedom NOT to go vote, but I'm just skeptical about the idea that it's done out of some high-minded purpose.
I wonder also about most self-styled "Unenrolled" or "Independent" voters. How many are actually like Kad (calling for a pox on both the D and R houses) and how many are really just partisans who "know better" and want to call themselves Indies for either professional or social reasons? In other words, they don't want to alienate the potential client or the uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner table?
How many times have you heard someone launch into a (very) partisan diatribe that started and ended with, "....and I'm an Independent!"
Post a Comment