Three-quarters of the people and three-quarters of the states will be mere spectators to the 2008 presidential election. This (and other) shortcomings of the current system of electing the president stem from the winner-take-all rule. This rule awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state.

Because of the winner-take-all rule, candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, or pay attention to the concerns of states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. Instead, candidates concentrate their attention on a small handful of closely divided “battleground” states. In 2004, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their money and campaign visits in just five states; over 80% in nine states; and over 99% of their money in just 16 states. The New York Times reported (May 11, 2008) that both major political parties have already reached the conclusion that there will be only 14 battleground states in 2008.

Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide. In 5 of the last 12 presidential elections, a shift of a few thousand votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate. The current system has produced the wrong winner in 4 of 55 presidential elections - a 1 in 14 failure rate.

Moreover, every vote is not equal under the winner-take-all rule. Al Gore won 5 electoral votes in New Mexico by carrying the state by a margin of 365 votes, while George W. Bush won Utah’s 5 electoral votes with a margin of 312,000 votes. A vote in a closely divided battleground state such as New Mexico was 833 times more important than a vote in Utah. And, Bush won the White House by virtue of a 537-vote popular-vote margin in Florida, despite Gore’s 537,000-vote margin the national popular vote - a margin of 1,000 to 1 in the importance of a vote.

The winner-take-all rule is not in the U.S. Constitution. It was not the choice of the Founders, as evidenced by the fact that it was used in only 3 states in the nation’s first presidential election. The U.S. Constitution gives the states exclusive and plenary control over the manner of awarding of their electoral votes. The winner-take-all is purely a matter of state law. The fact that Maine and Nebraska started awarding their electoral votes by congressional district in 1969 and 1992, respectively, is a reminder that the method of electing the President is a matter of state law that may be changed at any time and that a federal constitutional amendment is not required to change the system.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia).

In less than two years since its introduction into state legislatures across the country, the National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. As of June 2008, the bill has passed 19 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill is currently endorsed by 1,027 state legislators - 439 sponsors (in 47 states) and an additional 588 legislators who have cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.

The National Popular Vote bill is an interstate compact. It would take effect when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes-that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill is in effect, all of the electoral votes from the states that enacted the bill would be awarded, as a bloc, to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

The bill has been endorsed by the New York Times, Chicago Sun-Times, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Hartford Courant, Sacramento Bee, and numerous other newspapers and organizations.

70% of the public has long supported nationwide election of the president.

Additional information is available in the book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote (which may be read or downloaded for free at www.NationalPopularVote.com).

This entry was posted on 6.26.2008 at 1:11 pm and is filed under Government Reform. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response.