On February 21, Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi and twelve other Republican Senators introduced SB 538, which would allocate Pennsylvania’s presidential electors according to the proportion of the popular vote each presidential candidate received in the state. Pennsylvania has 20 electoral college votes, so a presidential candidate who got 5% could expect one electoral vote. If this plan had been in effect in 1992, Ross Perot would have received four electoral votes from Pennsylvania.
Gee – proportionial E.V. only in the Elephant controlled States ??? — i.e. one more gerrymander machination to game the EVIL system ??? Duh.
Abolish the evil insane timebomb Electoral College.
See 1860.
—
Uniform definition of Elector in ALL of the U.S.A.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
I like this. It gives us a target to work toward.
2 –
Absolutely! We NEED to reward gerrymandering
Better to reward the wishes of the citizens in each district than let one big city determine the wants and desires of an entire States Electoral College Vote.
I don’t see how this rewards gerrymandering, as it’s by overall percentage, not congressional district. So if we can get 5%, we get an electoral vote.
5 – You are correct. I was hasty in conflating this latest PA Republican effort to game the electoral system with others (awarding EC votes by CD, voter ID laws, e.g.). Thanks for the correction.
4 – Tell us all why citizens of rural areas of the country should have votes which count more than urban dwellers. How much mire should they be worth? Would a 3/5 valuation of urban/rural be satisfactory to you?
Ah yes – those ‘urban’ electors…
This is a partisan effort to amend a system already weighted in favor of one of your two parties by making it even more biased. Until the core problem – gerrymandering within the states (by either or any party) – is addressed this will always be a threat to your democracy