Despite John E. Sununu’s recent observations to the contrary (“Even better than the popular vote,” Op-ed, Nov. 5), our current system of electing the president is not equitable. The recent election clearly illustrated that candidates for president continually ignore the vast majority of states and citizens to focus their time, energy, and money on a small number of so-called swing states to get the magic 270 electoral votes required to secure the election.
Adoption of the National Popular Vote would change that dynamic for the betterment of society. The measure is extremely straightforward: States agree that their electors would vote for the candidate who receives the majority of votes nationally rather than vote for the candidate who prevails in their particular state. The result? The person who gets the most votes wins. How is that a bad outcome?
Comments
If not popular, at least do proprtional like Maine does.
@dugie9: Proportional distribution of the electoral votes in each state would never be "one person, one vote"! Please remember that citizens' votes are not equal under the current electoral college system. Massachusetts has 537,480 citizens per electoral college vote, while Wyoming has 174,277 citizens per electoral college vote. http://thehistoryprofessor.us/bin/histprof/states/states_ec.html
Maine does not do proportional voting. They use a formula where each district's electoral vote goes to the candidate who won that district, and the overall winner in the state gets two electoral votes. It is certainly far fairer than winner take all, and less confusing that trying to calculate what proportion of the total was earned. The NPV contract is, to my mind, also a poor choice, since it requires awarding a state's electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote regardless of whether or not the candidate won in that state. That disenfranchises voters, too.
NO, the rest of the country does NOT need to be told by Massachusetts voters what is best for them.
In keeping with the traditions of or founding fathers: one white male land-owner, one vote.