Proportional Allocation of Eelectoral Votes

[RetiredGySgt]

To the three of you I quote this;


That's 47% of the major party voters being Republicans. That's a lot of land that votes Jillian. That's a lot of rice fields and cows DCD. That's a lot of artichokes MaineBoy. Think about what would happen if 47% of California's electoral college votes went to a Republican candidate.

They are only FOR proportional in places like my State where the Republicans win the National Elections. In places where Dems win, no need for that at all, or at least that is their opinion.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I believe in "socialism"? what of your orifices did you extract that from?

I would completely support reducing the electoral college by 100 members and giving each state as many electoral college votes as they have congressional districts and to let them all be proportional.

I would prefer no Proportional splitting, BUT if we do then the 2 senatorial votes should go to the overall winner in a State. And rather than split the rest by district I would say if you REALLY want the one vote one person then the Congressional Electorials get split by percentage not by district. Gerrymandering is already bad, think how worse it would be if each district had a single electoral vote by majority.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What will happen if all States go to proportional voting for electoral College is that the House will select our President and the Senate will select our Vice President ( or vice versa if I have that wrong.

If we go to popular vote only all the small states are screwed and will never be represented by a President again.

 

[maineman]

They are only FOR proportional in places like my State where the Republicans win the National Elections. In places where Dems win, no need for that at all, or at least that is their opinion.

wrong. maine is proportional

 

[Annie]

wrong. maine is proportional

Wow, as off the 4/2000 Census they had all of 1,274,923 citizens. Of course, many couldn't vote, being too young. So they 'proportion' those votes out. Considering how many don't vote, how do they divide those 4 votes? 50/50?

Ah:

http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/me_ne.htm

Maine and Nebraska

Maine and Nebraska both use an alternative method of distributing their electoral votes, called the Congressional District Method. Currently, these two states are the only two in the union that diverge from the traditional winner-take-all method of electoral vote allocation.

With the district method, a state divides itself into a number of districts, allocating one of its state-wide electoral votes to each district. The winner of each district is awarded that district’s electoral vote, and the winner of the state-wide vote is then awarded the state’s remaining two electoral votes.

This method has been used in Maine since 1972 and Nebraska since 1996, though since both states have adopted this modification, the statewide winners have consistently swept all of the state’s districts as well. Consequently, neither state has ever split its electoral votes.

Although this method still fails to reach the full ideal of one-man one-vote, it has been proposed as a nationwide reform for the way in which Electoral votes are distributed.

See our page on Reform Options for the Electoral College to find more information.

One question, are these 4 districts 'gerrymandered'?

 

[maineman]

for maine it is top versus bottom.... not a lot of gerrymandering available when cutting the state in half so that half of the citizens are on one side and half on the other. I suppose we could have drawn the line vertically and divided the state east versus west, but that does not represent the different socioeconomic make ups as well as north-south does.

 

[82Marine89]

for maine it is top versus bottom.... not a lot of gerrymandering available when cutting the state in half so that half of the citizens are on one side and half on the other. I suppose we could have drawn the line vertically and divided the state east versus west, but that does not represent the different socioeconomic make ups as well as north-south does.

So you support the class system?

 

[maineman]

So you support the class system?

absolutely not.

I support dividing up the population of my state in some coherent manner.... east v. west....or north v. south.... the latter happens to be one where the socioeconomic and political leanings are more clearly defined. In Maine...the north is more conservative, and has less money, by and large. Even so, the north still continues to send democrats to congress, albeit socially conservative ones.

 

[jillian]

To the three of you I quote this;


That's 47% of the major party voters being Republicans. That's a lot of land that votes Jillian. That's a lot of rice fields and cows DCD. That's a lot of artichokes MaineBoy. Think about what would happen if 47% of California's electoral college votes went to a Republican candidate.

You're talking about proportional division of the electoal college. I say the electoral college is antiquated, gives unpopulated areas greater say in who our president needs to be gotten rid of. I'd draw your attention to Mr. Conley's post at:

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=625705&postcount=17

Why do you think that type of unequal representation is appropriate?

 

[Annie]

You're talking about proportional division of the electoal college. I say the electoral college is antiquated, gives unpopulated areas greater say in who our president needs to be gotten rid of. I'd draw your attention to Mr. Conley's post at:

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=625705&postcount=17

Why do you think that type of unequal representation is appropriate?

So Jillian, do you think minority opinions are of no count or small state in size or population?

 

[jillian]

So Jillian, do you think minority opinions are of no count or small state in size or population?

One man/one vote when it comes to president.

Minorities would be better protected by making our legislature more like a parliamentary system where diverse views truly ARE protected and the groups have to work together to find common ground because there are so many of them.

 

[DeadCanDance]

What will happen if all States go to proportional voting for electoral College is that the House will select our President and the Senate will select our Vice President ( or vice versa if I have that wrong.

If we go to popular vote only all the small states are screwed and will never be represented by a President again.

Stop crying.

Presidents are supposed to represent americans. Not states.

Senators represent states.

Small states are already disproportionately represented at the federal level. Wyoming has the exact same amount of senators as California.

And small states already determine who the president will be, as a result of the primary nomination process. The next president is always determined by New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Iowa. California, Texas, and New York have virtually no say in who is nominated for president.

 

[pegwinn]

In response to pegwinn's comments about the electoral college, based on the current system, rural states DO hold undue weight in the electoral college. For example, Wyoming, with a total population of about 515,000 people, has 3 electoral votes, or one for every 171,667 individuals. In contrast, California,
with a total population of approximately 37,700,000, has only 55 electors, or one elector for about every 662,865. Using division, we can calculate that, in the electoral college, a vote in Wyoming is worth roughly 3.9 times as much as a vote in California, far from the One Citizen, One Vote ideal.

Now one could argue that this system somehow protects minorities from some sort of oppression, but I ask, what minority is being protected? The people of Wyoming?

Yes, you are mathematically correct. However, the reality is that California received far more campaigning and candidate attention than did Wyoming. Thus, in a perfect world you are correct and in the real world I am.

One man/one vote when it comes to president.

Minorities would be better protected by making our legislature more like a parliamentary system where diverse views truly ARE protected and the groups have to work together to find common ground because there are so many of them.

Jillian, you do realize that there is a very good chance that you and I actually have no vote at all in the Presidential race don't you?

 

[maineman]

how does how much time or money spent in a state change the mathematics that provide the weight to individual votes in the electoral college?

 

[pegwinn]

how does how much time or money spent in a state change the mathematics that provide the weight to individual votes in the electoral college?

Do the math that figures out how many states it takes to win the whole enchilada. That is where the campaign and money is focused. The little states make little difference.

 

[maineman]

Do the math that figures out how many states it takes to win the whole enchilada. That is where the campaign and money is focused. The little states make little difference.

it does not change the FACT that the electoral college gives more weight to the votes of citizens in small states.

 

[82Marine89]

Stop crying.

Presidents are supposed to represent americans. Not states.

Senators represent states.

Small states are already disproportionately represented at the federal level. Wyoming has the exact same amount of senators as California.

And small states already determine who the president will be, as a result of the primary nomination process. The next president is always determined by New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Iowa. California, Texas, and New York have virtually no say in who is nominated for president.

You seem to be the one crying. The POTUS is supposed to represent the country, the Senators represent the states and the House of Representatives represent the people. Remember, we live in a republic, not a democracy. That is why Wyoming, and the other 49 states all have two senators. The number of representatives is then determined by population. This is why we do that census thingey every 10 years. You don't include the senators in this math and say the numbers don't match. It is equal representation under our Constitution.

 

[pegwinn]

it does not change the FACT that the electoral college gives more weight to the votes of citizens in small states.

That was already openly conceded based on math. Was there a point in there? Scroll back and reread it. I am not sure what we are arguing about. Take your time. I will wait.

 

[jillian]

Jillian, you do realize that there is a very good chance that you and I actually have no vote at all in the Presidential race don't you?

And, realistically, how many times have renegate members of the electoral college skewed the result?

 

[jillian]

That was already openly conceded based on math. Was there a point in there? Scroll back and reread it. I am not sure what we are arguing about. Take your time. I will wait.

I'm still wondering why you think it's a good thing that some guy in Idaho has a vote that's worth 3 or 4 of mine.