Electoral College Reform

Steve Eppley seppley at alumni.caltech.edu
Sun Nov 3 22:33:25 PST 1996

>DEMOREP1 wrote:
>>The KIS (keep it simple) principle applies.  A constitutional
>>amendment having an uniform definition of elector for federal
>>elections should be enacted

I replied:
>KIS is overruled by the difficulty of enacting constitutional
>amendments, compared to the relative ease with which citizens of
>a state can pass initiatives. 

I should have added that the ec reform initiative proposal is
actually fairly simple:

1. Immediately make available the cast ballots to any other
  state which wants to use them, using an electronic format.
2. Before tallying, eliminate any candidates who can't win a 
  majority of the electoral college.
3. Include the ballots of all other states which pass this same 
  proposal if they're made available electronically.
4. Tally the ballots.  If any ballots included in step 3 come 
  from states which award their ec delegates to a different 
  candidate than one selected in this step, eliminate those 
  ballots and repeat this step.  (Repeat this step until no 
  states' ballots are subject to elimination.)

That's all there is to it.  Nothing about weights, ratios, etc.

Donald wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>> Changing the ratio would require amending the U.S. Constitution, so
>> that's out of reach of the proposal.  But the imbalance will become
>> moot once all the states are in the RS: then the electoral college
>> will always be unanimous!  Even before all the states join the RS,
>> the imbalance will shrink in importance as the RS grows.
>By allowing the imbalance to become moot we are changing the ratio.

I wouldn't say that.  I'd say that the proposal leaves the ratios 
unmentioned and unchanged, but if enough states adopt the proposal 
then they will become irrelevant.

---Steve     (Steve Eppley    seppley at alumni.caltech.edu)

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list