# Oregon lawmakers consider changing how electoral votes are cast

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oregon-lawmakers-consider-changing-how-electoral-votes-are-cast/782238>\
**Category:** Politics & Elections\
**Created:** [March 15, 2017, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oregon-lawmakers-consider-changing-how-electoral-votes-are-cast/782238 "2017-03-15T15:24:11Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\
**Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oregon-lawmakers-consider-changing-how-electoral-votes-are-cast/782238/61 "2017-03-22T15:06:08Z")

</div>

> [@septimus](#):
>
> Just to be clear: Are you proposing national popular vote? Or just allocating a state’s current ev’s proportionally? In the latter case, be aware that each Wyoming voter will carry more than three times the weight of a California voter.

Litigated recounts would be a constant nightmare under this system. At least now, we only have recounts if the EC vote is very close _and_ the vote in one of the 51 jurisdictions is extremely close; i.e. if the major party vote is very close to a 50-50 split. But here, if, say, the vote in Illinois (20 EV) was 60-40, one electoral vote would hinge on whether the winner got 60%+1 or 60%-1, so the potential for recounts would expand exponentially. And the EC vote under this system would be close much more often than it is now.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oregon-lawmakers-consider-changing-how-electoral-votes-are-cast/782238.md?page=3)