OH SOS Jon Husted Latest Idea: Divide Electoral Votes by Congressional Districts, Would Work in GOP’s Favor

jon husted OH SOS Jon Husted Latest Idea: Divide Electoral Votes by Congressional Districts, Would Work in GOPs Favor

OH SOS Jon Husted Latest Idea: Divide Electoral Votes by Congressional Districts Would Work in GOP’s Favor

The residents in the state of Ohio, who support the Democratic Party take note:  Secretary of State Jon Husted’s latest idea, to divvy up Ohio by Congressional districts, would have handed the 18 electoral votes to Mitt Romney if he had his way:

He says we should make Ohio less important in the election by dividing up our electoral votes by Congressional district.

This is huge and should raise giant red flags. Under the current winner-take-all system, Obama won all 18 of Ohio’s electoral votes. Under Husted’s plan, 12 of those 18 electoral votes would be handed to Mitt Romney, the popular vote loser.

The reason for this is Ohio’s incredibly gerrymandered Congressional districts have been drawn to pack Democrats together so they have the majority in only 4 of the state’s 16 congressional districts. In addition to winning those four — assuming Husted would have us adopt the electoral vote allocation used by Maine and Nebraska, the only states to split their EVs by Congressional district — Obama would have also gotten the two at-large electoral votes bringing the final tally to 6 for Obama and 12 for Romney. Source

Besides making it incredibly harder for Ohioans to take advantage of early voting with an endless barrage of ridiculous lawsuits, it’s amazing this gem missed the mainstream media. The Republicans are out to steal elections from right under us by any means necessary and Jon Husted isn’t finished yet.

The following two tabs change content below.
 OH SOS Jon Husted Latest Idea: Divide Electoral Votes by Congressional Districts, Would Work in GOPs Favor
Janet Shan is a freelance journalist, blogger and social media consultant. Janet specializes in political and social commentary, as well as business writing. She is the founder and managing editor of the Hinterland Gazette. She is putting the finishing touches on her new novel, a mystery based in the hills on Montego Bay, Jamaica.
  • toto

    Maine and Nebraska use Husted’s proposed method. Maine and Nebraska voters prefer a national popular vote method.

    A survey of Maine voters showed 77% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
    In a follow-up question presenting a three-way choice among various methods of awarding Maine’s electoral votes,
    * 71% favored a national popular vote;.
    * 21% favored Maine’s current system of awarding its electoral votes by congressional district; and.

    * 8% favored the statewide winner-take-all system (i.e., awarding all
    of Maine’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most votes
    statewide).
    ***
    A survey of Nebraska voters showed 74% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
    In a follow-up question presenting a three-way choice among various methods of awarding Nebraska’s electoral votes,
    * 60% favored a national popular vote;.
    * 28% favored Nebraska’s current system of awarding its electoral votes by congressional district; and.

    * 13% favored the statewide winner-take-all system (i.e., awarding all
    of Nebraska’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most
    votes statewide).

    NationalPopularVote

  • toto

    It’s interesting that the leadership committee of the Nebraska Republican Party adopted a resolution requiring all GOP elected officials to favor overturning their congressional district method for awarding electoral votes or lose the party’s support.

    Dividing more states’ electoral votes by congressional district winnerswould magnify the worst features of the Electoral College system.

    If the district approach were used nationally, it would be less fair and less accurately reflect the will of the people than the current system. In 2004, Bush won 50.7% of the popular vote, but 59% of the districts.
    Although Bush lost the national popular vote in 2000, he won 55% of the country’s congressional districts.

    The district approach would not provide incentive
    for presidential candidates to campaign in a particular state or focus the candidates’ attention to issues of concern to the state. With the 48 state-by-state winner-take-all laws (whether applied to either districts or states), candidates have no reason to campaign in districts or states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. In North Carolina, for example, there are only 2 districts (the 13th with a5% spread and the 2nd with an 8% spread) where the presidential race is competitive. Nationwide, there have been only 55 “battleground” districts that were competitive in presidential elections. With the present deplorable 48 state-level winner-take-all system, 80% of the states
    (including California and Texas) are ignored in presidential elections; however, 88% of the nation’s congressional districts would be ignored if a district-level winner-take-all system were used nationally.

    Awarding electoral votes by congressional district
    could result in third party candidates winning electoral votes that would deny either major party candidate the necessary majority vote of electors and throw the process into Congress to decide.

    Because there are generally more close votes on district levels than states as whole, district elections increase the opportunity for error. The larger the voting base, the less opportunity there is for an especially close vote.

    Also, a second-place candidate could still win the White House without winning the national popular vote.

    A national popular vote is the way to make every person’s vote equal and matter to their candidate because it guarantees that the candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states and DC becomes President.