The Electoral College

One of the problems with our winner-take-all, state-by-state system for electing presidents is that it gives the impression that an entire state or region votes and thinks a certain way. Yet, even here in Kerry Country California there are areas as staunchly Republican as the middle of Alabama and, as you note, even in Texas there are outposts of progressive thought.

The problem is the Electoral College. But isn't going away because we'd have to convince the small states who benefit from the overrepresentation it gives them to give it up, and that ain't happening. My suggestion is to divide the votes more proportionally within the states, which can be done under current law. States are allowed, under the Constitution, to decide how their votes are apportioned, so there's no constitutional change required.

Each individual electoral vote represents a seat in Congress. I suggest tying each vote to how a specific Congressional district votes, with the two Senate seats going to whoever wins statewide. Maine and Nebraska do something like this.

What this does is put most states back into play in presidential elections. California would have votes to offer the GOP, and Texas would have something to offer the Democrats. Even Colorado would have something to give each side. Every state becomes a potential "swing" state, which is how, I think, we'd get states to sign on.

Even the Republicans I know speak in favor of a more direct vote for the president. "All the GOP does in California is raise money," one told me. Gee, that sounds mighty familiar, I thought. So I think they'd back a way to bring electoral votes closer in line with the popular tally within opening up the entire Constitution.

My modest proposal for the evening.