Linked by Howard Fosdick on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:12 UTC
Editorial In the United States, state and local authorities are in charge of voting and the country uses more than a half dozen different voting technologies. As a result, the country can't guarantee that it accurately counts national votes in a timely fashion. This article discusses the problem and potential solutions to the U.S. voting dilemma.
Permalink for comment 541936
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: EC can be fixed easily
by MollyC on Sun 11th Nov 2012 06:36 UTC in reply to "RE: EC can be fixed easily"
Member since:

I agree that using the gerrymandered congressional districts would be wrong. May as well go to a parlaimentary system instead (which I don't want). And it was shown in an article yesterday that Romney would've won under that system, despite losing the popular vote by three million votes (as I write this), since the current congressional districts were gerrymandered by the Republican party since they controlled the state legislatures at the time the most recent gerrymandering occurred (which is why the Republicans won the most House seats, despite losing the House popular vote).

As for a national popular vote for president, first here has to be a national ballot/voting mechanism. The moment you go to a national popular vote, you cannot have states using different voting systems (different numbers of hours of early voting, differences in allowing vote-by-mail, differences in voting stations per capita, etc), because the different voting systems of each state cause voting to be "easier" (i.e. more convenient) in some states than in others, so some states have a naturally higher voter participation, which would skew a national popular vote count.

I've actually come to like the electoral college, myself. But if we get rid of it, I'd rather go to popular vote than congressional district based voting, for the reasons stated above.

Reply Parent Score: 2