An idea to lessen the red state - blue state divide

[CTLawGuy]

electoral votes should be awarded proportionally, like delegates are in the democratic primary (15% threshold), rather than the current winner take all system. The problem with the winner take all system is that it effectively forces everyone in the state to vote for one candidate even though a significant minority in the state might want the other candidate. I think a proportional system would more accurately reflect the mood of the state.

It would have an added benefit: preventing future Florida 2000's. Under a winner take all system, a few hundred FL votes was the difference between a candidate getting 27 votes and getting 0. Under a proportional system, the stakes would be a lot lower - who would get 14 vs. 13 votes?

Looking at the 2008 election, here's how the votes would have broken down in some "red" states under a proportional system

State POP VOTE % CURRENT EV PROPROTIONAL EV

TX M 55% O 43% : M 34; O 0 : M 19; O 15

OK M 66% O 34% : M 7 ; O 0 : M 5 ; O 2

UT M 62% O 34% : M 5 ; O 0 : M 3 ; O 2

KY M 57% O 41% : M 8 ; O 0 : M 5 ; O 3

(Here's how I got to the Proportional EV total using the Dem primary delegate calculations: (1) find the state election results. (2) Add up all the votes for any candidate who got over 15% of the vote, known as a "qualifying candidate." This is the total "qualifying vote." (3) For each qualifying candidate, divide his or her votes by the qualifying vote and get that candidate's "adjusted percentage." The total adjusted percentage for all qualifying candidates should equal 100%. (4) Take each qualifying candidate's adjusted percentage and multiply it by the number of available EVs. You will get an "integer" (i.e. "4" or "7") and a "remainder"(i.e. ".45346" or ".1123"). (5) award each qualifying candidate the number of EVs equal to the integer. There should be one EV remaining. (6) Award the last EV to the qualifying candidate with the largest remainder.)

The only realistic way to implement this is to have a national compact whereby no state will implement the proportional system until all states agree to it. Unlike a dem primary, the general election is a state function and a state has the constitutional power to award its votes however it wants. The problem is, if one or a few states do this, and the others don't, it will hurt one of the parties. For Example:

All else being equal, if only CA implemented this, Obama would have lost and McCain would have gained 21 EVs. It would not have cost Obama the election but it would have put a dent in his winnings.

CA O 61%; M 37% : O 55; M 0 : O 34; M 21

It is clear that in a closer elecion, this could be fatal. So it would need to be done on some kind of nationwide basis.

I would hope my red state DU friends would agree with a system like this. I think it would be fairer and more representative :)

[Sub Atomic]

1. The Republicans have been trying to do this for years to California.

Your parroting their meme is not going to win you over any friends on this site.

[Oregone]

3. I thought Republicans were attempting to give all EVs to popular vote winner

This is distinctly different and it essentially ignores the fake national "popular vote"

The results of a nation wide proportionally allocation of EVs is one of the fairest measure of the "people's will". It takes into account a variety of factors that may suppress/enhance voter turnout regionally, and equalizes the measure to each state nationwide.

[WonderGrunion]

4. Only two states currently allow this, Maine and Nebraska.

Maine has never split its' votes, Nebraska has once giving President Obama an electoral vote in an otherwise red state. Just because Repukes have been trying to target California with this doesn't make it a bad idea if applied everywhere.

[CTLawGuy]

6. well those are slightly different

instead of treating the state as winner take all, they have each district winner take all plus a state winner take all from 2 of the EVs.

[CTLawGuy]

5. with all due respect

I don't need to "win friends" on this site. Who are you to say that anyway?

[iamjoy]

2. Another Benefit to This

The way I see it is that this could encourage extra party candidates and give them more of a chance. You bring up the 2000 election - the current vote counts have insured Gore's victory, but Nader might actually have gotten more votes as progressives who considered Gore too moderate would have felt more comfortable voting for the Green Party candidate.

Of course, the real way to help with that would be a instant run off process.

But, when they do the proportion would it be by Congressional District? That's how Florida allocates Convention delegates in the primary. That could really lead to some skewed results (although no worse than winner take all).