Might it look like this?
From Fake is the New Real
1.31.2010
A balanced electoral college
Posted by Shin-pei at 12:44 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
mostly sensible thoughts on public space
About this blog
Projects
Gothamist // Jane Jacobs Memorial // This Place Is... // Reinventing Grand Army Plaza + results + tiny press // reviews in Urban Design Review // New Amsterdam Bike Slam press // NPR Marketplace segment: Public Health, Built Environment, Better Living // I'll swim to you // Planning Corps +interview + tiny press + Queens Boulevard: A Book of Precedents + MIT CoLab Radio article + Urban Omnibus article + "Spontaneous Interventions" U.S. Pavilion at 13th Venice Biennale for Architecture // City as Lab // Anyone know Portuguese? // Cities and Climate Change: Small Enough to Act, Big Enough to Matter
Here and there
Links - Slightly Random
- A Daily Dose of Architecture
- A Public Space
- Anarchitecture
- Archinect
- Aurash Khawarzad
- BaSiC Initiative
- Ben Marcus (inspired the name)
- Biking Rules!
- Bldgblog
- Block Party NYC
- Center for Architecture
- Center for Urban Pedagogy
- City of Sound
- CitySkip
- Civic Hacker
- David Byrne
- Design Trust for Public Space
- DoTank Brooklyn
- Ekosystem
- Fake Is the New Real
- Green It Yourself
- List of Women Speakers for Your Conference
- Michael Mandiberg
- MIT CoLab
- MIT SENSEable City Lab
- New Amsterdam Bike Slam
- Next American City
- Nick Grossman
- Open Source Planning
- Our universe
- Park(ing) Day NYC
- Personism
- Planning Corps
- Polis
- Princeton Architectural Press
- Pruned
- Public Space
- Rachel Abrams
- Spacing
- Streetsblog
- The Bruce High Quality Foundation University
- The Polis Blog
- The Street Plans Collaborative
- Tom Vanderbilt
- Tomorrow Lab
- Transportation Alternatives
- Urban Omnibus
- Urban Sketchers
- Urban Tick
- Urbanitis
- Velo, Rapido
- VVORK
- Wooster Collective
Blog Archive
- Jan 2014 (2)
- Mar 2013 (1)
- Jan 2013 (1)
- Dec 2012 (1)
- Nov 2012 (2)
- Mar 2012 (2)
- Jan 2012 (2)
- Nov 2011 (2)
- Aug 2011 (1)
- Jul 2011 (1)
- Jun 2011 (1)
- May 2011 (6)
- Apr 2011 (2)
- Mar 2011 (4)
- Feb 2011 (3)
- Jan 2011 (1)
- Nov 2010 (2)
- Oct 2010 (1)
- Sep 2010 (2)
- Aug 2010 (1)
- Jul 2010 (6)
- Jun 2010 (2)
- May 2010 (3)
- Apr 2010 (10)
- Mar 2010 (11)
- Feb 2010 (12)
- Jan 2010 (12)
- Dec 2009 (14)
- Nov 2009 (5)
- Oct 2009 (7)
- Sep 2009 (2)
- Aug 2009 (1)
- Feb 2009 (1)
- Jul 2008 (1)
- May 2008 (2)
- Apr 2008 (6)
- Mar 2008 (13)
- Feb 2008 (9)
- Jan 2008 (2)
- Dec 2007 (1)
- Jul 2007 (9)
- Jun 2007 (12)
- May 2007 (26)
- Apr 2007 (17)
- Mar 2007 (10)
- Feb 2007 (8)
- Jan 2007 (11)
- Dec 2006 (11)
- Nov 2006 (12)
- Oct 2006 (14)
- Sep 2006 (8)
- Aug 2006 (11)
- Jul 2006 (11)
- Jun 2006 (16)
- May 2006 (27)
- Apr 2006 (26)
- Mar 2006 (22)
- Feb 2006 (9)
- Jan 2006 (10)
- Dec 2005 (9)
- Nov 2005 (7)
- Oct 2005 (20)
- Sep 2005 (9)
- Aug 2005 (11)
- Jul 2005 (18)
- Jun 2005 (11)
- May 2005 (14)
- Apr 2005 (20)
- Mar 2005 (18)
- Feb 2005 (31)
- Jan 2005 (36)
- Dec 2004 (31)
- Nov 2004 (29)
- Oct 2004 (24)
1 comments:
A more likely reform . . .
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.
The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law on how those votes are awarded.
The bill is currently endorsed by over 1,659 state legislators (in 48 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). The recent Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University poll shows 72% support for direct nationwide election of the President. This national result is similar to recent polls in closely divided battleground states: Colorado-- 68%, Iowa --75%, Michigan-- 73%, Missouri-- 70%, New Hampshire-- 69%, Nevada-- 72%, New Mexico-- 76%, North Carolina-- 74%, Ohio-- 70%, Pennsylvania -- 78%, Virginia -- 74%, and Wisconsin -- 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): Delaware --75%, Maine -- 77%, Nebraska -- 74%, New Hampshire --69%, Nevada -- 72%, New Mexico -- 76%, Rhode Island -- 74%, and Vermont -- 75%; in Southern and border states: Arkansas --80%, Kentucky -- 80%, Mississippi --77%, Missouri -- 70%, North Carolina -- 74%, and Virginia -- 74%; and in other states polled: California -- 70%, Connecticut -- 74% , Massachusetts -- 73%, Minnesota – 75%, New York -- 79%, Washington -- 77%, and West Virginia- 81%. Support is strong in every partisan and demographic group surveyed.
The National Popular Vote bill has passed 29 state legislative chambers, in 19 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon, and both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington. These five states possess 61 electoral votes -- 23% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
Post a Comment