The current system of electing the president ensures that
the candidates do not reach out to all of the states. Presidential candidates
concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. In
2008, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their campaign events and ad money in
just six states, and 98% in just 15 states (CO, FL, IN, IA, MI, MN, MO, NV, NH, NM, NC,
OH, PA, VA, and WI). Over half (57%) of the events were in just four states (Ohio,
Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia). In 2004, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of
their money and campaign visits in five states; over 80% in nine states; and over 99% of
their money in 16 states, and candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their money and
campaign visits in five states and over 99% of their money in 16 states.
Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely
spectators to the presidential elections.
Candidates have no reason to poll, visit,
advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they
are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the state-by-state
winner-take-all rule enacted by 48 states, under which all of a state's electoral votes
are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state.
A candidate has woin the Presidency without
winning the most popular votes nationwide in one of every 14 presidential
elections.
In the past six decades, there have
been six presidential elections in which a shift of a relatively small number of votes
in one or two states would have elected (and, of course, in 2000, did elect) a
presidential candidate who lost the popular vote
nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill would
guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50
states (and DC).
Every vote, everywhere, would
be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Candidates would need to
care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing
states.
The bill would take effect only when
enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--that
is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into
effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential
candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The bill uses the power given to each state by
the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes
for president.
The congressional district method of
awarding electoral votes (currently used in Maine and Nebraska) would not help make
every vote matter. A smaller fraction of the country's population lives in competitive
congressional districts (about 12%) than in the current battleground states (about 30%)
that now get overwhelming attention , while two-thirds of the states are ignored Also,
a second-place candidate could still win the White House without winning the national
popular vote.
See
http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
No comments:
Post a Comment