# Should states be able to split electoral votes? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 12, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813 "2012-11-12T20:00:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/21 "2012-12-09T10:37:05Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > This. As it is, the two states where this has been proposed recently, Ohio and Pennsylvania, are severely gerrymandered, and it’s basically a bare-faced attempt by Republican elections officials to give most of the state’s electors to the Republican candidate regardless of whether or not s/he’s the candidate the people of the state vote for. Is the gerrymandering in Ohio and Pennsylvania really all that bad? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/22 "2012-12-09T11:16:35Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Yes, they could, but what state wants to be the first to do this? States like Pennsylvania which are controlled by GOP, but currently give all their electoral votes to the Democrat. IIRC, such “reforms” are being proposed specifically in those states. ---
**Author:** ![flodnak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/838e76/32.png) [@flodnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flodnak)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/23 "2012-12-09T12:21:53Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > Is the gerrymandering in Ohio and Pennsylvania really all that bad? I don’t know about Ohio, but you can see the results of PA district gerrymandering in [this Wikipedia article.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania's_congressional_districts) In a state that has given its electoral votes to the Democratic candidates in the past six elections, and where one senator is a Democrat and the other a Republican, it doesn’t make much sense that the will of the people demands 13 fairly safe Republican districts to only 5 (also fairly safe) Democratic districts. ETA: There _are_ fair ways to divide up districts, using statistics. One popular method is called the shortest split-line method, and is exactly what it says on the tin: find the shortest set of lines needed to divide each state into the correct number of districts, with approximately equal populations. This would result in a map that looked nothing like the current Congressional district map in Pennsylvania. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/24 "2012-12-09T12:26:43Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > Is the gerrymandering in Ohio and Pennsylvania really all that bad? 12 out of OH’s 16 districts are held by Republicans in a state that votes almost exactly 50/50 between the two parties, and the districts in the Cleveland area were redrawn in the most recent redistricting specifically to force Dennis Kucinich out of office (he was forced into a primary against another Democratic incumbent). ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/25 "2012-12-09T13:49:51Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > States like Pennsylvania which are controlled by GOP, but currently give all their electoral votes to the Democrat. IIRC, such “reforms” are being proposed specifically in those states. I see. PA would be losing a lot of its power in the Presidential race, though. Currently it is a battleground state (at least it lures GOP candidates, and then Dem candidates). If it went to PR, with the winner getting 12 and the loser 10, it would be the single most worthless state in the country in terms of EVs. ---
**Author:** ![black\_rabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f19dbf/32.png) [@black\_rabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/black_rabbit)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/26 "2012-12-09T15:26:26Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > 12 out of OH’s 16 districts are held by Republicans in a state that votes almost exactly 50/50 between the two parties, and the districts in the Cleveland area were redrawn in the most recent redistricting specifically to force Dennis Kucinich out of office (he was forced into a primary against another Democratic incumbent). Yup. We also have Hamilton County, and therefore Cincinnati, split right down the middle between OH-01 and OH-02, both of which are mostly rural by area. Meaning that Steve Chabot (of Clinton Impeachment fame) and Jean Schmidt (of calling a 38-year Marine veteran a “coward” fame) get to split the vote in a City with a Democratic mayor and a majority Democratic city council. ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/27 "2012-12-09T17:26:46Z")
Sure, as long as it’s per popular vote and not per voting district, which is what some want to do. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/28 "2012-12-09T17:59:20Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I see. PA would be losing a lot of its power in the Presidential race, though. Currently it is a battleground state (at least it lures GOP candidates, and then Dem candidates). If it went to PR, with the winner getting 12 and the loser 10, it would be the single most worthless state in the country in terms of EVs. It would be a bad idea for Pennsylvania, but it would be a good idea for the Republican Party to dilute the Democratic vote. The plan would only make any sense if every state did it. Even then, it would probably be a horrible system. For example, a state that has four EVs. Would a candidate have to get 75% of the vote to get that third EV? States with three or five EVs suddenly become more important than states with four or six. That hardly seems democratic. ---
**Author:** ![Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e47c2d/32.png) [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hershele_Ostropoler)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/29 "2012-12-09T21:37:24Z")
> [@waterj2](#): > > It would be a bad idea for Pennsylvania, but it would be a good idea for the Republican Party to dilute the Democratic vote. The plan would only make any sense if every state did it. Even then, it would probably be a horrible system. For example, a state that has four EVs. Would a candidate have to get 75% of the vote to get that third EV? States with three or five EVs suddenly become more important than states with four or six. That hardly seems democratic. Not if it were truly proportional, and if people voted their actual preferences (I would actually want to combine a Borda count with Sainte-Laguë or even D’Hondt, but having been a poll inspector, I think it would be too hard to convince people a switch to either of those didn’t mean they were being disenfranchised, let alone both). ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2012, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/30 "2012-12-09T23:26:14Z")
If you really want a truly representative system, we could choose Representatives through a Monte Carlo process. Pick N people at random from the population of the state, and each one of them can hand-pick a Representative. On average, this would give _exactly_ the right partisan breakdown, with no penalty at all against third parties: If 5.3% of the population is Libertarian and 2.4% is Green, then you’d get an average of 5.3% and 2.4% of the Representatives being those parties. Now, granted that you’d get the occasional outlier who’s crazy or has extremist views, but the House of Representatives is a large enough body that that shouldn’t be significant. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2012, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/31 "2012-12-11T20:54:13Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > If you really want a truly representative system, we could choose Representatives through a Monte Carlo process. Pick N people at random from the population of the state, and each one of them can hand-pick a Representative. On average, this would give _exactly_ the right partisan breakdown, with no penalty at all against third parties: If 5.3% of the population is Libertarian and 2.4% is Green, then you’d get an average of 5.3% and 2.4% of the Representatives being those parties. Now, granted that you’d get the occasional outlier who’s crazy or has extremist views, but the House of Representatives is a large enough body that that shouldn’t be significant. I’ve heard this argument before, but how would it work in practice? Just because I’m a Libertarian (not really, but assume) doesn’t mean that I support just any old Libertarian for Congress. For example (really) I am a registered Republican, but voted for the Democratic candidate for Congress last month. Why would the process assume that because 5% of the population in a state with 20 seats in Congress are registered Libertarians, that those 5% want whatever candidate the Libertarian party bosses promote? ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2012, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/32 "2012-12-11T21:07:39Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > If congressional districts were drawn without bias, it might be nice to give one EV to the winner of each district and two to the statewide winner, to mirror the Congressional representation that electoral votes… mirror. This has long been my proposal. It does make district design a higher issue, but that can be handled as well (California is already making adjustments). ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2012, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/33 "2012-12-11T21:53:46Z")
> [@](#): > > I’ve heard this argument before, but how would it work in practice? Just because I’m a Libertarian (not really, but assume) doesn’t mean that I support just any old Libertarian for Congress. For example (really) I am a registered Republican, but voted for the Democratic candidate for Congress last month. > > Why would the process assume that because 5% of the population in a state with 20 seats in Congress are registered Libertarians, that those 5% want whatever candidate the Libertarian party bosses promote? You don’t need to assume anything about organized political parties. If you were the lucky voter who got selected, you could pick anyone you wanted. Maybe it’s the guy who officially calls himself a Libertarian. Maybe it’s a guy who calls himself a Democrat. Maybe it’s your cousin Frank who doesn’t identify with any party, but who you think has good horse sense. It could be _anyone_, and so would represent everyone. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2012, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/34 "2012-12-12T20:55:37Z")
> [@Kevbo](#): > > This is pretty much what was done on a precinct (or was it by county?) basis for the 2008 Democratic primary, and the fact that Obama’s team understood it from the get-go and Clinton’s team was very slow on the uptake made a huge difference. > > Delegates were awarded “proportionally”…BUT: Say they had two delegates to award…each candidate got one each unless there was a huge difference in votes…like say 2:1 (don’t know the exact formula. > > Team Obama focused on areas where there was an odd delegate up for grabs, and where there were enough delegates that a small percentage difference in vote could yield extra delegates. So Clinton could win the popular vote in a state and even most of the precincts (or counties or whatever), yet still come up short on delegates. In Democratic primaries, 3/4 of each state’s pledged delegates (i.e. non-Superdelegates) are awarded by congressional district, proportionally (divide the number of votes by the total number of votes for all candidates who got at least 15% of the vote in that district, and round down; any “leftover” delegates are awarded to the candidate(s) with the highest fractional delegate values in that district). However, caucuses work slightly differently; each precinct caucus gets a certain number of county convention delegates, which are awarded to the candidate(s) (including “uncommitted”) who get at least 15% of the votes at that caucus. The county caucuses do the same thing to award their congressional district level caucus delegates; those delegates then decide how that district’s national convention delegates are awarded (as well as deciding on the state convention delegates, which decide the “at-large” national convention delegates). IIRC, in the Nevada caucus, Clinton got most of the precinct level votes, but by the time they rolled up to the state level, Obama ended up with more national delegates, and both sides claimed that their candidate had “won” Nevada, along with the corresponding claim that this showed that their candidate was more “electable”. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2012, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/35 "2012-12-12T21:00:51Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I’ve heard this argument before, but how would it work in practice? Just because I’m a Libertarian (not really, but assume) doesn’t mean that I support just any old Libertarian for Congress. For example (really) I am a registered Republican, but voted for the Democratic candidate for Congress last month. > > Why would the process assume that because 5% of the population in a state with 20 seats in Congress are registered Libertarians, that those 5% want whatever candidate the Libertarian party bosses promote? Probably because there is very little crossing of party lines in votes. Each Representative is supposed to represent the people in a particular area; that way, each area is more likely to have someone sympathetic to “local” concerns. Having all Representatives represent the entire state could cause problems (and yes, I realize there are a number of states where their one Representative covers the entire state); if all of California’s Representatives were from southern California, would they care about northern California’s concerns? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2012, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/36 "2012-12-13T02:14:54Z")
> [@Hampshire](#): > > Rather than states rewarding their electoral votes in a winner take all fashion would it be more fair to be able to divy them up by result percentages? > > So for a state like Florida that gave Obama 50% of the vote and Romney 49.1% they would give Obama 15 and Romney 14. > A few states with an even amount of electoral votes and a close election would split them up evenly like Ohio (50.1% to 48.2%) each guy gets 9, > and places like D.C. (91.4% to 7.1%) would give all 3 to Obama. > California 33 Obama / 22 Romney, Texas 16 Obama / 22 Romney, etc. > > I ran the race using this method and it still gives Obama the win 274 to Romney’s 264 but it seems a more accurate method to represent each state. Your numbers would probably change if you re-ran them now, but it’s still a bit scary to think that an election that Obama won by a 3.7% popular vote margin could potentially be 5 close calls away from being thrown into the House of Representatives. Under this system, [Romney’s four planes](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/romney-called-ohio-fight-election-night/58823/) would definitely have had reason to be sent out to states where an EV seemed to be going for Obama by a hair. 1. If we’re gonna do something to bring EVs more in line with the popular vote, let’s just do direct popular vote. It’s less manipulable. 2. If medium-to-big states were going to move to splitting their EVs, either everyone should do it at once, or the party whose bright idea it was should start with their big states first. If the Dems think it’s a great idea, they can start with NY and CA; if the GOP is pushing it, let them start with Texas. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2012, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/37 "2012-12-13T04:05:28Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Here’s what the constitution says: > Sounds like they could designate them alphabetically if they wanted! 🙂 The question is, “should states be able to,” not, “can states.” You’re missing the point, which you should be able to tell, unless you’re such a positivist you can’t tell the difference. ---
**Author:** ![ahduval](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahduval/32/11513_2.png) [@ahduval](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ahduval)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2012, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/38 "2012-12-16T16:45:31Z")
The trouble with these plans is that it still gives the statewide winner a bonus, Since there are more people living in the urban areas, that could still win the election. Enter SB723 in Virginia: > [@](#): > > Provides that the Commonwealth’s electoral votes shall be allocated by congressional district. Receipt by a slate of presidential electors of the highest number of votes in a congressional district constitutes the election of the congressional district elector of that slate. Receipt by a slate of electors of the highest number of votes in a majority of congressional districts constitutes the election of the two at-large electors of that slate. In the event no slate receives the highest number of votes in a majority of districts, receipt by a slate of the highest number of votes statewide shall constitute election of the two at-large electors of that slate. [http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/12/10/virginia\_republican\_senator\_wants\_to\_gerrymander\_the\_state\_s\_electoral\_college.html](http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/12/10/virginia_republican_senator_wants_to_gerrymander_the_state_s_electoral_college.html) Its brilliant. first gerrymander the state to remove as many of the opposition party seats as possible. Then award electoral votes by those districts and then award a bonus for winning most of those districts. ---
**Author:** ![Lok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e8c25b/32.png) [@Lok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lok)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813/39 "2012-12-17T04:29:55Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > > [@drewtwo99](#): > > > > Is the gerrymandering in Ohio and Pennsylvania really all that bad? > > 12 out of OH’s 16 districts are held by Republicans in a state that votes almost exactly 50/50 between the two parties, and the districts in the Cleveland area were redrawn in the most recent redistricting specifically to force Dennis Kucinich out of office (he was forced into a primary against another Democratic incumbent). > [@black\_rabbit](#): > > Yup. We also have Hamilton County, and therefore Cincinnati, split right down the middle between OH-01 and OH-02, both of which are mostly rural by area. Meaning that Steve Chabot (of Clinton Impeachment fame) and Jean Schmidt (of calling a 38-year Marine veteran a “coward” fame) get to split the vote in a City with a Democratic mayor and a majority Democratic city council. And Toledo, a much smaller city is split between 3 districts, one of which, OH-4, runs all the way down and around the bottom of one of the others, OH-5, until it almost reaches Dayton at the other end of the state. And the other district there is OH-9, which holds onto the edge of Lake Erie, with the only connection between its 2 halves the State Route 2 bridge over Sandusky Bay. It only makes sense, a district should be spread out from Toledo to Cleveland. :rolleyes: [Article and map here](http://manwiththemuckrake.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/ohios-gop-gerrymanders-districts-with-surgical-precision/). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-states-be-able-to-split-electoral-votes/640813.md?page=1)