By Paul Fidalgo
Published September 6th 2007 in Vallejo Times-Herald
In its editorial "2008 vote: Electoral College is flawed, but so is this tinkering" (Sept. 1), the Times-Herald gets the California scheme to allocate electoral votes by congressional district just right in characterizing it as a power-grab. However, it also espouses a common misunderstanding about the National Popular Vote Compact when stating that it is "a flawed approach at best and could result in all of California's votes being cast for someone that the state's voters had rejected."
The truth is that the compact would nullify the Electoral College altogether, and once enacted it would ensure that literally every Californian's vote would count equally. What happens to the electoral votes of a given state should be viewed as mere technicality, because implementation of the compact would turn the College into a simple formality, leaving election of the president up to every single American, regardless of where they happen to reside.
Paul Fidalgo, Communications Director
FairVote - The Center for Voting and Democracy
Takoma Park, MD
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.