[EM] NPV vs Condorcet

[Paul Kislanko]

Step 1 is getting the idea through the US Senate, where there's a majority
of {states that would lose power}.

I stick with the "impossible" claim, because they won't "start" with
anything other than the status quo. And anything that weights the small
states the same as what they have now is a non-starter with the large
starts.

Yes, I claim "impossible."

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Ketchum [mailto:davek at clarityconnect.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 10:54 PM
To: Paul Kislanko
Cc: 'Kristofer Munsterhjelm'; election-methods at lists.electorama.com
Subject: Re: [EM] NPV vs Condorcet

It may be difficult, but useless to claim impossible.

Could start the thinking by considering weighting the votes from the small 
states, consistent with the advantage they get via the Electoral College.

DWK

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:15:45 -0500 Paul Kislanko wrote:
> Re:
> Is the Electoral College recognized as having lived ot its useful life?
If 
> so, perhaps we could do up a worthwhile constitutional amendment.
> 
> For the same reason we have an Electoral College there's no way to get a
> Constitutional Amendmendt on the ballot - such a suggestion would have to
> pass the Senate, wherein even the smallest state has two representatives
who
> would be against the idea.
> 
> For the same reason the EC is bad, it can't ever be changed - it gives an
> inordinate amount of authority to the "small" states, and those states,
now
> that they have it, are not likely to give it up.
-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.