Changing how PA awards electoral votes in presidential elections -- is there a better way?

Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:17

Changing how PA awards electoral votes in presidential elections -- is there a better way?

Written by Scott LaMar, Director of Radio Smart Talk

Radio Smart Talk for Thursday, September 22:

State Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R-Delaware) touched off a political firestorm in Pennsylvania and across the country when he proposed changing the way the state awards its electoral votes in presidential elections. Currently, the presidential candidate who wins Pennsylvania's popular vote is rewarded with all 20 of the state's electoral votes. Under Pileggi's proposal, the electoral votes would go to the winner of the popular vote in each of Pennsylvania's 18 Congressional districts.

Pileggi says the switch would more accurately reflect the wishes of voters. Critics counter Pennsylvania would lose it's clout nationally in presidential races.

Many agree the Electoral College is not the best way to elect presidents but aren't convinced the district approach is the way to fix it.

What do you think?

We'll have analysis on Thursday's Radio Smart Talk with Dr. G. Terry Madonna, Professor of Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College and Dr. Michael Young, former professor of Politics and Public Affairs at Penn State University and managing Partner of Michael Young Strategic Research

LISTEN TO PROGRAM:

Published in Smart Talk

Tagged under

comments

# Warren Rich 2011-09-21 19:45

The problem I see with Sen. Pileggi's proposal is that if every state did this it would be create a greater probability of electing a president with a minority plurality. This could lead to the abolition of the electoral congress, and I am not sure that is a better option. Do we want a president who does not represent more than 50% of the population?

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Brooke 2011-09-22 01:09

This could make presidential elections extremely complicated. We witnessed Bush get elected by a court decision in Florida in 2000. If every state adopted this kind of method we could end up with several disputes in dozens of different Congressional districts every single presidential election. I don't think anyone wants to see elections take longer to be decided or for our elections to be decided based on which candidate can gather up more money to spend on a bigger legal team.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Jim 2011-09-22 06:28

Sen. Pileggi's proposal is attractive. But, it only makes sense for Pennsylvania IF, and only if, the other states do it as well. Otherwise, PA would lose substantial clout as a battleground state in the Presidential sweepstakes.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Michael Ember 2011-09-22 09:09

The Electoral College was established
because the founders of our country knew there the citizenry could not gather enough information on Presidential Candidates to make an informed decision. In high school civics class, the Electoral College was informally derided as having been outdated by modern communication. I maintain the opposite is true. Mass communication reduces our choices to two people, two people very few of us know. If the Electoral College were used as designed, we would be voting for people we know to the extent we know our congressional representatives and who would be entrusted to select the people who would best represent our views.

On a semi-related subject, ask your guests to explain why the sixty million people in Italy, who nearly all practice the same religion and speak the same language have six major political parties but the United States with its diverse population of over three hundred million, only gets two?
Michael Ember - Dillsburg

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post