How to Separate the Electoral College Even More from the Popular Vote

Plans are afoot in Michigan (and elsewhere) to change how the State awards its electoral votes in presidential elections by dropping the winner-take-all system for one based on the winner of each of the state's congressional districts.

According to the plan, for the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, Michigan would award 14 of its 16 electoral votes according to the U.S. House district lines drawn by Republicans in 2011 to favor Republican candidates. (As evidenced by the fact that almost twice as many Michigan citizens voted for Democratic candidates as for Republicans, but the Republicans won more of the races.)

Governor Rick Snyder has signaled he is willing to consider this major change in how electoral votes are allocated in Presidential elections.  He told The Associated Press for a story looking at Republican efforts to drop the winner-take-all system in states that have reliably gone for the Democratic presidential nominee in recent elections that he "could go either way."

Here's an example of what the change could mean: According to an analysis by Daily Kos, in 2012, Republican Mitt Romney would have won nine of the districts and President Barack Obama the other five, so Mr. Romney would have pulled nine electoral votes to seven for Mr. Obama, who won the state by 9.5 percentage points.

So, it's clear that the proposal to allot electoral votes by congressional district would run counter to the popular vote in a significant way.

If Synder hopes to be a Governor for ALL the people of Michigan, he'll quash this blatantly Republican-serving plan to do away with the winner-take-all system.  But, unless he hears strong protests from Involved Voters, I think he's likely to go with the flow and support the plan of fellow Republicans.

Update: For a satirical look at this topic, watch Stephen Colbert here: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/423114/january-22-2013/the-word---win--lose--or-redraw