Frank Bures, like other defenders of the Electoral College (Commentary, April 3), seems determined to ignore the world in which he presumably lives.
Everyone who pays attention knows that presidential candidates ignore the citizens of forty or more states in order to lavish their time and money on one or two handfuls of "battleground states." But here comes Bures to assure us that this must be an illusion and that "mathematically" the Electoral College has the effect of "increasing the voting power of every person in the country"--including, presumably, all the voters of California, New York, Illinois, Texas, Utah, Wyoming and every other state whose citizens, on account of the Electoral College, are snubbed by presidential aspirants.
It turns out that we are to ignore what's in plain sight and consider instead that it's more likely that a candidate carries Minnesota by a single vote, and therefore prevails in the Electoral College, than that a candidate wins the national popular vote by a single ballot. Consequently, says Bures, the Electoral College magnifies the value of every vote.
You'd have to be a sucker to fall for this pitch. The chance of Bures's scenarios being realized are zero and zero, respectively. Moreover, if you happen to be a Republican living in New York or a Democrat living in Utah, you are a sucker if you think it even matters whether you vote. The Electoral College has the practical effect of disenfranchising you. There is no chance that your vote will help elect the next president. And, unless you too inhabit some alternative universe, it is impossible for you not to know this as you consider whether or not to vote.
The mathematical considerations that apply to the Electoral College are not the surreal ones advanced by Bures. In the last election, 170,000 Romney voters in Wyoming secured for the Republican nominee 3 electoral votes. Meanwhile, in California, 6.5 million Obama voters put 55 electoral votes in his column. That the Consitution will never be amended to abolish the Electoral College can be explained by the ability of state legislators in small states to do long division.
Which is why the National Popular Vote movement is such an inspired stroke for what would be an exemplary reform.
