Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Election Reform Part 2

Proposal #2 End "winner take all" system for assigning Indiana's presidential electors.

If Evan Bayh is nominated for president or vice-president by the Democrats, Indiana may very well become a battleground state in the next election. No party will then be able to comfortably say that they will win this state's 11 electorial votes. This is why it is in the best interests of everyone to consider switching to a more equitable way of assigning Indiana's presidential electors.

Under the current system, if one presidential candidate receives a slight majority, or even a plurality of Indiana's popular votes, they would get all 11 of Indiana's votes.

There are several systems that we can consider switching to. The first is the Maine Method. In Maine, whoever wins the popular vote in the entire state wins 2 electorial votes. Then whoever wins in each congressional district would receive one electorial vote.

The second system is proportional distribution. Under that system, each candidate would receive electorial votes based on the proportion of vote that they get in the election. Let's say Bayh gets 4/11ths of the vote, McCain gets 5/11ths, and Trey Parker gets 2/11ths. Bayh would then get 4 electorial votes, McCain would get 5 electorial votes, and Parker would get 2.

There is also a system being proposed in other states in which all of the most populous states simple agree to have their electors vote for who ever wins the nationwide popular vote. This would require the cooperation of many states, but it could end the possibility of lawsuits deciding who gets to be president.

2 comments:

  1. Jeff Pruitt12:09 AM

    I would fully support this.

    Another point - this would increase voter turnout. In any state that is dominated by one party, many feel their vote is "wasted" and choose not to stand in line and "waste their time". I fully believe we should support measures that increase voter turnout...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Amen to the previous comment. I live in a very blue State. While the race for President was close on a national scale, there was no way that any one vote in Connecticut was going to change the outcome. It would have been nice to know that it was at least some reasonable possibility that one person's vote could have made a difference in the number of electors for any candidate. Usually, I am not much in favor of "turning out the vote" because people who are not interested and not knowledgable about politics probably should stay home, but it isn't good for people to sit out an election because they think their votes don't count.

    ReplyDelete