Non-winner-take-all electoral college

As some of you may know, I can't stand the winner-take-all system for the electoral college. Whoever wins the most votes (be it 87% or a mere 34% in a three way race) wins ALL votes for the state during the presidential race. Not only is this horrendously unfair (particularly in mega-states like California and Florida) but it all but eliminates any chance of having third-parties gain any support, because you have to 'win' first place.

Now don't get me wrong, I LIKE the main aspect of the electoral college: it gives smaller states more of a voice in who becomes president. However, what I can't stand is the fact that a few 'swing states' are the only ones who really determine the outcome of the election. The presidency is the only national elected office we have (well, that and the VP, more on that later). EVERY state should be a swing state.

Okay, here's my plan. Bear in mind, the president is not (and shouldn't be) elected directly by public. He/she is elected by electors from the electoral college. All I want to do is tweak how the electors are chosen.

First off, this idea builds off my proposed congressional reforms from way back in September 2006 (go check it out). Very basically, congressional representatives are chosen statewide (i.e. no districts). If the state has 6 seats, then the top 6 win. My tweak would be that for each person who gets (re)elected to congress, then their party gets one elector.

Since the electoral college is based purely on the number of seats in Congress, we have to look at the Senate as well. In order to do the same thing as above, senators would have to be elected every 2 years. To do this we could add a third senator to every state, ensuring an election every cycle and increasing the power of smaller states (Yay!).

In any case, we should still have the Presidential candidates name on the ballot. But whoever gets the most direct votes for President would only get 2 electors, not the whole shebang. The rest would be determined by the # of incoming congressmen.

Many more states would be in play this way, as people would be voting more for parties than people. Presidents are much more likely to have their party in power in congress, and there would be more new people voted into (and out of) congress on a regular basis. Not only that, but third parties can actually start picking up votes in the electoral college. Every state comes into play, congressional elections soar in importance, and become harder to hold on to.

The main effect of this is that party branding and party loyalty become paramount. Coattails become insanely important, in both directions. To maximize your vote for the president, you have to vote for their party in congress, even if that means voting against your popular and powerful representative from the other party in favor of a new guy.

Best of all, this kind of reform can be started at the state level. State legislators can abolish congressional districts, and make congressional seats state-wide elections. They can change how their electoral college votes are distributed. This sort of change can be spread slowly, reforming the system from the bottom up. And it is designed to force new blood into Congress, which can facilitate other revolutionary ideas along the way...


Lurker