Electoral College: Did I Say "Glacier Speed"?
---
I have posted before on how the best way to scrap the Electoral College is not to scrap it at all, but rather to amend it to the District Method of allocating electoral votes.
In that post, I said the following.
Well, turns out those glaciers move pretty dang fast:
Of course, purely proportional allocation is not entirely the same (and has more potential problems) than the District Method. But it's unquestionably better than all-or-nothing electoral voting.
It will be interesting to see how the Amendment 36 campaign plays out (i.e., the arguments made for and against it). And if it indeed passes, then we'll have to wait and see whether it has any legs.
More thoughts, not all in agreement, at The Agitator, Key Monk, Bit Bucket and Volokh.
(Cross-linked at Outside the Beltway...twice.)
In that post, I said the following.
On a state-by-state basis, perhaps there will some movement away from all-or-nothing electoral awards. But expect any change to be at glacier speed.
Well, turns out those glaciers move pretty dang fast:
A state plan to scrap the winner-take-all system of allocating electoral votes in Colorado is heading to the ballot in November. If passed, Amendment 36 would make Colorado the first state to allocate electoral votes proportionately according to the popular vote, rather than giving a winner all of the state's electoral votes.
Of course, purely proportional allocation is not entirely the same (and has more potential problems) than the District Method. But it's unquestionably better than all-or-nothing electoral voting.
It will be interesting to see how the Amendment 36 campaign plays out (i.e., the arguments made for and against it). And if it indeed passes, then we'll have to wait and see whether it has any legs.
More thoughts, not all in agreement, at The Agitator, Key Monk, Bit Bucket and Volokh.
(Cross-linked at Outside the Beltway...twice.)
Posted by KipEsquire on
17 August 2004
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.
