[EM] electoral college/Serious thoughts

[Curt Siffert]

On May 2, 2004, at 11:27 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:

> On Sat, 1 May 2004 21:58:06 -0700 Curt Siffert wrote:
>
> I see no sense in your words for swing states.  Try 20 electors with 
> strongest party getting 10, second party getting 9, and remaining 5 
> percent of vote determining whether remaining elector goes to Nader or 
> a party.

I'm just saying there are scenarios where proportional EVs only awarded 
in an integer sense can get dicey.  I came to this view after reading 
this page:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/2003/10/electoral_colle.html
and its comments.

>> The problem with it going to the house is that gerrymandering means 
>> that the GOP has the advantage there even if the CW is Democrat.
>
> Agreed that gerrymandering can muddy the water, but what makes you 
> certain of 26 Rep delegations, considering that the House CAN have a 
> Dem majority?

Really just two things - first, the GOP currently has a gerrymandering 
advantage and should continue to until the next redistricting.  The 
second is merely a situational thought relating to the 2004 election 
only - I think that the GOP currently has.... what, a six-state 
advantage?  If there is enough of a sea change in the House so that the 
GOP would have less than 26 delegations after November, I am 
comfortable with the assumption that it would mean Kerry landed more 
than 269 EVs, in which case it wouldn't go to the House anyway.

BUT my main points are simply that if we are going to be all right with 
<269 scenarios continuing to go to the House, then we should advocate 
the House's makeup being related to the voting activity that year, and 
right now that's pretty weakly linked.  And, that as the E.C. is a 
two-party system, with both parties caught between reaching for the 
center and solidifying their bases - being a disincentive to 
*overreaching* - it means that close elections are more likely than 
just being a random occurrence.  And so, a third party receiving any 
EVs only increases the likelihood of no one reaching 270.  To win the 
E.C. outright and avoid the House, a candidate has to get more EVs than 
all other candidates combined.  This is harder with more than two 
participating candidates, especially if we start allowing proportional 
EVs.  It's one case where winner-take-all states helps reduce the 
possibility of the House scenario.

Curt