Republicans Consider Changing Electoral College to Skew Presidential Election in Their Favor

For Republicans Winning By Corrupting the System is Still Winning

The method of electing the President of the United States that is enshrined in the Constitution is an unusual one, to say the least.  Each state is given a number electoral votes, equal to the number of Congressmen and Senators that are allocated to the state.  The state then has substantial discretion over how those electoral votes are allocated and cast.

For almost all states the methodology is that each state’s total electoral votes are allocated and cast for the candidates that has the most popular vote in that state.  But this method is not in the Constitution, and two states, Maine and Nebraska, allocate their electoral votes by Congressional District. 

Now the state of Pennsylvania is considering a Republican proposal to change the way it awards its electoral votes.  Pennsylvania has been a reliable Democratic state, voting for the Democratic candidate in every election since 1988.  The state has 20 electoral votes for 2012 and if Mr. Obama wins the state he will get all 20 electoral votes.

Republicans control the state of Pennsylvania, and as a result control how Congressional Districts are drawn.  The eighteen Congressional Districts in the state are currently expected to generate 12 Republican members of the House and 6 Democratic House members.  With the proposal under consideration, a Presidential candidate would win an electoral vote for each Congressional District that he or she won, and the other two electoral college votes would be awarded to the candidate who won the total vote in the state.

Under this rule, here’s what happens.

If the change were in place next year, Mr. Obama, as the Democratic nominee, could win the popular vote and carry the six Democratic districts but end up with just 8 electoral votes, while the Republican nominee would take 12.

The rationale for such a plan has been put forth by the Republicans

The plan is being pushed in Harrisburg, the capital, by the Senate majority leader, Dominic Pileggi. He said Friday in an interview that the change would make the system more fair because voters in each Congressional district would be awarding their own electoral vote.

“The goal is to have the votes in the Electoral College more closely reflect the popular vote,” he said. “This is one way to do that.”

. 

Really, that’s what he said.  Now The Dismal Political Economist never likes to use the “L” word, but there is not other way to describe these statements other than as a boldface lie.  The most recent poll in Pennsylvania shows Mr. Obama with a big lead in the state, so everyone knows exactly what is going on here.

Strangely enough, the current lack of popularity of Mr. Obama may work in his favor in this case.  If Republicans feel they can win Pennsylvania outright, they will not vote to change the rules.  See its not a principle at stake here, like so many issues with respect to Republicans, principles are not involved.

Surprisingly enough, The Dismal Political Economist is not opposed to such a plan in principle.  But there are two huge caveats.  The first is that before such a plan is implemented the drawing of Congressional Districts must be fair and balanced and an end to gerrymandering must take place.  The second is that the system must be adopted nation wide.  Well, no one expects Republicans or Democrats to give up gerrymandering, and as for implementing the system nationwide,

a switch in Pennsylvania could have long-term national consequences. It could prompt similar moves in other big states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio, where Republicans recently took control.

But of course don’t expect Republicans to play by those conditions.  For them, they are so convinced that their positions on the issues are the only correct ones that an electoral college arrangement where winner take all rules apply in Republican states and proportional awarding of electoral votes takes place in Democratic states seems absolutely correct. 

See, if your positions on the issues are divinely inspired, democracy is just something that sometimes gets in the way, and something that Republicans just have to work around.