Columnist Susan J. Demas
writes that Michigan Republicans "are primed to rig how Michigan awards its electoral votes in lame duck, when no one is paying attention."
Currently and throughout the nation's history, in all but Maine and Nebraska, states go with the winner-take-all approach when it comes to the Electoral College. But in the past few years, Republicans in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin have pondered formulas that award some portion of the electoral votes based on which presidential candidate wins each congressional district. They gave it up under intense pressure.
But Demas thinks retiring Michigan Rep. Peter Lund, who has twice introduced bills to split the state's electoral votes, wants to be GOP state chair. To boost his chances, he might push the legislature in its lame duck session to finally pass his proposal. The result?
Well, consider that Barack Obama thumped Mitt Romney by 10 points (almost 450,000 votes) in Michigan in 2012. Under the GOP electoral college plan, Romney would have taken more of our electoral votes anyway, because he won more congressional districts.
That kind of undermines the whole "one person, one vote" thing.
So how did Romney win more districts? It wasn't magic or even much skill. Every 10 years, we get new districts. The Legislature gets to draw the map, and Republicans were in charge this time around.
It's easy to see this as a thimble-sized issue. But if just five states had adopted the split-the-vote approach prior to the 2012 election, President Romney would have been sitting in the Oval Office 20 months. Here is what the results would have looked like: Florida's 29 Electoral votes for Obama, split 17-12 in favor of Romney; Michigan's 16 votes for Obama, split 9-7 in favor of Romney; Ohio's 18 votes for Obama, split 12-6 in favor of Romney; Pennsylvania's 20 votes for Obama, split 13-7 in favor of Romney; Virginia's 13 votes for Obama, split 8-5 in favor of Romney; Wisconsin's 10 votes for Obama, split 5-5 in favor of Romney. If the system had been installed nationwide, it would have given Romney even more electoral votes. And McCain would have won in 2008.
Real reform, as opposed to this partisan maneuvering, would require doing away with the Electoral College altogether, which would require the unlikelihood of passing a constitutional amendment or an approach such as that of
National Popular Vote. The NPV advocates seek an interstate compact under which states agree to cast all their Electoral College votes to whomever wins the popular vote
nationwide. To activate the compact takes agreement from states with 270 electoral votes. So far, 10 states and the District of Columbia have signed on for a total of 161 electoral votes.
If Michigan Republicans want to fix the anomalous Electoral College, they should pass legislation adding their state to the compact. But, of course, they are interested in rigging the system, not fixing it.
