If you wish to offer comments,
please click-on this image to sign my guest book.
Smart GB WebSite
|
Introduction - The Basics of the Proposal
1 ... Eliminates use of Electoral Votes and Electors. Electoral Points are offered instead. 2 ... Arranges the 50 states (and the District of Columbia) into five groups of ten (or eleven) each. 3 ... Each group offers a specific number of points, depending on its Priority Status in the particular election. 4 ... "Winner Take All" abolished. Each eligible candidate receives appropriate shares of available points in each state. 5 ... "Voluntary Concession Option". In certain situations, a runner-up may concede an election to the leading candidate. ALSO..... Grouping of states in each election; How points are earned; Details of each election; Election Statistics and Summaries. |
|
1 - Elimination of Electoral Votes and Electors : Electoral Points System : Run-Off This proposal would do away with the current method in which electors are chosen and Electoral Votes are cast for President and Vice President. Instead, Electoral Points would be awarded directly to the candidates. The candidate who earns the most points -AND- who is equal with or better than the particular election's minimum "Need-To-Win" mark would be the election winner. If there is no outright winner, then the top two points leaders would face each other in a run-off election which would normally occur three to four weeks later. The run-off should produce a clear outright winner. However, in the extremely unlikely event that there is no run-off winner, then the matter would be decided by the U.S. Congress, either under existing laws or under laws adopted to go with the Electoral Points Format. Each state, as well as the District of Columbia (D.C.), in accordance with a specific group assignment in a given election year (see below), would offer a specific amount of Electoral Points. Such points would be distributed among each eligible candidate who has at least 5.00% of the particular state's popular vote. To help minimize big landslides and create a more competitive atmosphere, there would never be any occurance of "winner-take-all" unless there is only one candidate in the particular state with at least 5.00% of that state's total popular vote. For any election to be won outright using Electoral Points, the leading candidate must earn at least 50% plus ten of all available points. For example, in a given year where 155,000 total Electoral Points may be available, at least 77,510 (half of 155,000 plus 10) will win it outright. If this requirement is not satisfied, then a run-off between the top two Electoral Point Leaders would be conducted three to four weeks after the initial election. The run-off would offer the same amount of Electoral Points as in the initial election, as well as the same "Need-To-Win" mark. |
|
2 - Arranges the 50 states (and District of Columbia) into five groups of ten (or eleven) each There would be five groups of states -- A, B, C, D and E -- each with ten states as members. The "A" Group would also have an 11th member, the District of Columbia (D.C.). The arrangements of the states and D.C. into each of these groups would be based purely on alphabetical order. Key factors such as U.S. Census population rank, Congressional apportionment or the re-shaping of certain areas by any political entities would not play any role whatsoever in this particular arrangement process. It should be pointed out that in the examples presented for years 1900 thru 1956, the Union membership was less than 50 states, and the District of Columbia's inclusion in Presidential elections did not occur until 1964. In 1900 and 1904, the U.S.A. had 45 states. Oklahoma joined the Union as the 46th state in 1907, and its citizens first voted for President in 1908. New Mexico and Arizona were admitted as the 47th and 48th states respectively in 1912, just in time for the 1912 election. Alaska and Hawaii respectively became the 49th and 50th states in 1959, and their citizens cast their first votes for President in 1960. So for the 1900 and 1904 elections, the five groups will each have nine members. Oklahoma's addition in 1908 will alter the arrangement, and Group E will gain a 10th member. Then, after Arizona and Mexico join the USA in 1912, Groups A, B and C will each have ten members, while Groups D and E each have nine members. This arrangemen will remain in place until 1960, with the addition of Alaska and Hawaii, and 1964, when D.C. is added. |
|
3 - Each group offers specific number of points, depending on its Priority Status, in a given election In each election, the priority order of the five groups would be rotated, and Electoral Points offered by each group would be based on priority order ranking, as follows -- 1st Priority: 5,000 points for each member; 2nd Priority: 4,000 points for each member; 3rd Priority: 3,000 points for each member; 4th Priority: 2,000 points for each member; 5th Priority: 1,000 points for each member. This kind of rotation of priority status and points offering among the five groups in each election would have a profound effect on the overall campaigning strategy of all candidates. In some years, the areas where a particular candidate might expect to do well would reside within the higher priority groups, which would play a large part in shaping the campaign strategy of any opponent. However, there may also be some years when group priority status does not greatly favor any one candidate. |
|
4 - "Winner-Take-All" Rules Abolished The practice of unconditional "winner-take-all" in each state, based on which candidate has the most popular votes in the particular state, regardless of their percentage share of that state's total popular vote, would be abolished. In the Electoral Points process, the greatest share of Electoral Points from any state that a leading candidate can potentionally receive is limited to 75 percent. Example - if the particular state offers 2,000 points, the 75% share amount is 1,500. The 75% limit rule would be waived -ONLY IF- the leading candidate is the -ONLY PERSON- in the particular state with at least 5.00% of that state's total popular vote. In cases where the leading candidate has slightly less than 75% of a state's popular votes, but is then found to have 75%-or-more of the popular votes just between themselves and any other eligible candidates in that particular state, then the evaluation figure rather than the raw state figure will have priority. |
|
5 - Voluntary Concession Option in Run-Off Situations There may be occasional elections where the leading candidate finishes a few points short of the need-to-win mark, while the second place candidate is well behind the leader. The overall odds and trends greatly favor the leader in a run-off. Whenever such a scenario may occur, the second place candidate would have the option of voluntarily conceding the election to the leader, which would eliminate the need for a run-off. If the second place candidate officially submits a Voluntary Concession, then from that person to the leader will pass the difference between the leader's initial point total and the need-to-win mark plus 10 points. For example, in an election with 152,000 total points and a need-to-win mark of 76,010, the leader and runner-up finish with 75,051 and 47,914 points respectively. The leader is 959 points short of the need-to-win mark and the second place finisher is 27,137 points behind the leader. After careful research of odds trends, the second place candidate chooses to declare a Voluntary Concession. Upon verification of the concession, the leader receives 969 points from the runner-up, thereby making their final point totals 76,020 and 46,945 respectively, and the leader is officially certified as the election winner. |
|
Other Electoral Points Proposal Topics Grouping of The States .. 1960 to the Present | 1900 to 1956 Covering U.S. Presidential Elections from 1900 to the present, this pages shows the states in their assigned groups, and then the priority ranking arrangement of the groups for a given election. How The Candidates Earn Electoral Points This page explains -- by way of several example scenarios involving two-or-more candidates -- how Electoral Points are earned. Elections - Results using Electoral Points Covering U.S. Presidential Elections from 1900 to the present, each of these pages shows how an election could be won or lost (or else result in a run-off between the top two candidates) using Electoral Points. Also, comparisons involving Electoral Points, actual popular votes and actual electoral votes are presented. Modern Era -- 50 States and D.C.: 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 Early Era -- 45, 46 and 48 states: 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 Election Statistics The widest and closest margins of victory between candidates; instances where run-offs might have occured; closest margins of victory in relation to the "needed-to-win" mark; most and least points earned for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place; listing of 4th and 5th place finishers. Election Summaries »»» Modern Era: 1960 to Present Early Era: 1900 to 1956 Brief looks at the results of each election from 1900 to the present day. All candidates earning electoral points are mentioned. Each brief look shows total tallies of Electoral Points, electoral votes and popular votes for the leading candidates. |
|
Do you like this website? If you wish to offer comments, please click-on this image to sign my guest book. |
Smart GB WebSite |