A Stitch in Haste

Long-time readers of my blog know that I am a fierce supporter of the District Method of casting electoral votes, in which the winner-take-all system is preserved, but at the Congressional District level, not the state level (the two electors corresponding to a state’s Senate seats would continue to be awarded on a statewide winner-take-all basis).

Currently, only two states, Maine and Nebraska, apply the District Method, and neither has ever actually split its electoral vote.

But now it appears that may change:

President Bush campaigned Thursday in Maine, looking to pick up support in a state that divvies up its electoral votes and where even a partial victory on Nov. 2 could tip a close election his way.
…
Maine, with four electoral votes, is one of two states that doles them out among presidential candidates, rather than giving all to the winner. The winner of the statewide popular vote gets two electoral votes, and the winner in each of Maine’s two congressional districts receives one, making a 3-1 split possible.
…
The Bangor area, in northern Maine, is of particular interest to Bush because it is in the congressional district he lost by a slimmer margin than the southern district. Bush put his campaign headquarters in Bangor this year rather than in Portland, where he set up in 2000. Portland is in the district Bush lost by more than 27,000 votes.

Now imagine this sort of “targeted campaigning” in California, New York or Illinois, states that might be “Red” or “Blue” in the aggregate but have significant pockets leaning to the other side. Presidential campaigns would become far more “national” in the sense that the candidates would visit far more states. And this would come without the risks of a simple popular vote, which is almost certainly unworkable, not to mention the dubious Colorado proposal.

The District Method is a workable compromise that both moves away from the archaic and unfair statewide winner-take-all system without the nightmare litigation scenarios possible under a national popular vote or the Colorado proposal. It’s absolutely ideal.

Which apparently is why absolutely no one is pushing for it.

POST SCRIPT: Too bad the reporter didn’t stop to read his own story when he crafted the headline “Bush Seeks Electoral Vote or Two in Maine” — it’s mathematically impossible to get only two electoral votes in Maine under the District Method; the vote must go either 4-0 or 3-1.

UPDATE: Captain Ed points to a CNN electoral map that is projecting a Maine split 3-1 for Kerry. Again, this would be the first time in modern history that a state split its electoral vote and could catalyze a serious discussion regarding Electoral College reform.

My previous Electoral College and related posts:
Electing an Electoral Alternative (flagship material)
Electoral College: Did I Say “Glacier Speed”? (Colorado Proposal)
Florida Recount: 2000 + 4 = 2000
Electoral College Reform: An Update (response to New York Times editorial)
Are You Sure You Want a Popular Vote?
Electoral College: Thoughts from Alan Simpson (Constitutional amendment process)
Electoral College: WSJ Latest to Drop the Ball (response to Wall Street Journal editorial)
Charge of the Law Brigade (campaigns preparing for election lawsuits)
(Re-)Charge of the Law Brigade (update)

(Cross-linked at Outside the Beltway.)

Tweet This