If Pennsylvania had passed the Maine/Nebraska plan

[rob in cal]

  Several years ago PA GOP governor Corbett was talking about PA adopting the Maine/Nebraska electoral college vote by congressional district idea, which would have guaranteed several PA electoral college votes to the GOP even if they lost the state. Imagine if that had gone through and its impact on 2016.  Ironically, there would be less campaigning in the state probably, but discussion about those divided PA electoral college votes would be a big part of the overall road to 270 discussion.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Trump would be the favorite if it had happened.

[OwlRhetoric]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

[Arbitrage1980]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

I think this could have disastrous consequences. It will encourage A LOT of 3rd party and independent candidates since they can win electoral votes by simply winning at least one congressional district. This in turn dramatically raises the probability of the election being decided by the House. Sure, it's constitutional, but I don't think it's a good precedent.

[Virginiá]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

It is an awful idea. Since such a plan would be based on how CDs are drawn, it would literally allow Republicans to gerrymander the electoral college nearly as bad as the House.

And this plan at the time was not just confined to PA, either. The RNC was pushing it in many battleground states they controlled as they wanted to leverage their success in 2010 to rig presidential elections as well, since they often can't seem to win them the normal way.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Romney would have won if every state adopted this plan despite losing the PV by 4%.

It's not a good idea at all.

[Xing]

Yeah, if PA did this, Hillary could win it by double digits and still get fewer EVs than Trump, or only break even. Not exactly fair.

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

Romney would have won if every state adopted this plan despite losing the PV by 4%.

It's not a good idea at all.

[Boston Bread]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

It would make PA less interesting... instead of 20 EVs that are potentially competitive, only 5 or so would be competitive.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Yeah... this would disenfranchise urban voters (and by extension, minorities) something fierce. Horrible Plan.

[dax00]

Disenfranchisement is a big issue with the plan. The solution: divide all CDs by computer algorithm.

[Zarn]

If every state that is not 3 votes only adopted this, then it might be wise to amend the US Constitution to allow a '2nd election' for the two highest vote receivers like in France. However, knowing us, it would be unnecessarily expensive to run. We can't do anything, without spending too much money. The determination of what constitutes a major party should be done with the first vote.

[Stockdale for Veep]

If important states did this, both parties would say enough's enough and take it to the Supreme Court.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Yeah, if PA did this, Hillary could win it by double digits and still get fewer EVs than Trump, or only break even. Not exactly fair.

It's gerrymandered to hell and back.

[Devils30]

I think a liberal Supreme Court would declare the PA proposal unconstitutional.

[Figueira]

An easy extra 13 electoral votes for Trump.

He could still lose, though.

[Xing]

Yeah, if PA did this, Hillary could win it by double digits and still get fewer EVs than Trump, or only break even. Not exactly fair.

It's gerrymandered to hell and back.

Exactly, thus why Hillary would still get fewer EVs even if she won it easily.

[pbrower2a]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

Nebraska and Maine have some justification because the two districts are different.

Gerrymandered districts intended to alter the partisan basis of representation in Congress could be construed to distort the popular vote. Congressional districts are usually seen as arbitrary entities with no other legal significance.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

Nebraska and Maine have some justification because the two districts are different.

Gerrymandered districts intended to alter the partisan basis of representation in Congress could be construed to distort the popular vote. Congressional districts are usually seen as arbitrary entities with no other legal significance.

Would any elections outcomes have changed if every state went to CD allocation?  I think 2000 wouldn't have.

I'm too lazy to compile this, though so...

[Coolface Sock #42069]

This only works in relatively homogeneous states and states with compact districts. Doing it in Pennsylvania would be hideously unfair.

[Figueira]

I think a liberal Supreme Court would declare the PA proposal unconstitutional.

It's terrible, but I don't see why it's unconstitutional.

[angus]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

I agree with you.  In fact, I'd go further, but this would be a step in the right direction.  

Among other things, it would increase the likelihood that elections would be decided in the US House of Representatives, which I've always thought was the intention of many of the Framers, and which would be particularly useful in this general election.  

Some authors have also claimed that it would increase independent and alternate-party candidate participation in presidential elections, and some have even made the case that it would increase voter turnout.  

All are good reasons to support your idea, in my humble opinion.  The horribly-drawn districts in places like Pennsylvania (and Maryland) are irksome, but they are fodder for a different debate--one worth having, to be sure--but don't let any of these posters bully you or your excellent idea just because the Pennsylvania legislature has its head up its ass.  

[IceAgeComing]

Disenfranchisement is a big issue with the plan. The solution: divide all CDs by computer algorithm.

This is a very bad idea for a variety of reasons: the biggest is that the whole point of having a FPTP system is to represent communities of interest and getting a computer to just draw random lines to be "fair" would never give you a map that would do that at all well: it'd chop up towns and cities and all sort of .  You can have fair (well, as fair as possible under FPTP) boundaries drawn by humans that are better than anything a computer could do - I'd point you towards the UK (well, here they manipulate the rules to fiddle things but the constituencies drawn to those rules are generally fair), Canada and Australia for examples of that: there are complaints about individual seats sure but generally everyone accepts the process as fair and producing a decent map at the end of it.  If you're going to start doing things by computers and defeat the point of FPTP, you may as well move to some form of PR at that point; it'd be better in practically every way.

[pbrower2a]

If a state is to divide its electoral votes and have more than 5, then:

1. Let each other electoral vote represent a share of the vote. Assign two to the winner of the plurality. Such reflects the Senate seats, and we can call those electoral votes the 'Senatorial' votes.  There must be an incentive for winning the plurality.

2. Votes for independent or third-party candidates can be divided into the total vote to determine whether any independent or third-party nominee gets enough votes to win a full share. If none, then all independent and third-party votes within that state shall be ignored for the second round of apportioning.

3. The second-place candidate shall get enough electoral votes in accordance with the shares of the popular vote. For example, a nominee who gets 46.28% of the two-main-party vote in a state with twelve electoral votes shall get four full electoral votes representing 40% of the popular vote. No partial vote shall be assigned.

4. The winner of the popular vote gets the rest.

5. Whoever gets an absolute majority of votes in the state gets the rest. Thus a winner in a state with twelve electoral votes who gets 53.72% of the popular vote will get six votes from the apportionment of non-Senatorial votes and of course the two Senatorial votes.  

Advantages:

1. It recognizes third-party nominees who get significant votes in any state.

2. It makes relevant the significant minorities (Hispanics and blacks in Texas; agrarian interests in Illinois) whose votes for President are usually ignored because they are inaccessible in the national contest in statewide winner-take-all contests. Southern blacks usually get stepped on in Presidential politics,  and such distorts the political process.

3. In a true two-way race one gets less chance of a landslide.

4. Gerrymandering to set up Congressional districts to distort the popular vote has no relevance in the Presidential election. Gerrymandered districts that would distort the Presidential vote would not pass Constitutional muster. the situation in which D-leaning cities like Lansing, East Lansing, Kalamazoo, and Grand Rapids are diluted with R-leaning rural areas (I know Michigan much better than I know Pennsylvania, and the GOP in state legislatures did much the same in Michigan as in Pennsylvania) so that the Democrats have a few 70D-30R districts and lots of 53R-47D districts. Distortion of the vote in any state to fit some artifice violates the Constitutional emand for one man-one vote.  

5. Presidential elections would be closer to majority rule. There would be less likelihood of one state's total being decided by a handful of votes ultimately deciding the election. Thus Florida 2000 becomes much less likely

Disadvantages:

1. In a close election, a significant third-party nominee can mess things up.  For this, the existing apportionment (largely winner-take-all) can be used.

2. It is not as clear as the largely winner-take-all system that most states have. The last votes of some states might take months to decide.

  

[Young Conservative]

More states should adopt electoral vote allocation by CD. Makes things interesting.

It is an awful idea. Since such a plan would be based on how CDs are drawn, it would literally allow Republicans to gerrymander the electoral college nearly as bad as the House.

And this plan at the time was not just confined to PA, either. The RNC was pushing it in many battleground states they controlled as they wanted to leverage their success in 2010 to rig presidential elections as well, since they often can't seem to win them the normal way.

Why did you say "republicans?" Both parties gerrymander from california and maryland to north carolina and florida (before the court ordered redistricting). Calling people out ISN'T and SHOULDN'T be restricted to party. Both parties use the system.