This is a response to Jeffrey Dean’s recent letter to the editor. His comments relate to three myths that are addressed at the National Popular Vote website. I’ll paraphrase the quick responses to these myths, but I urge interested readers to examine the detailed responses.

First is the myth that big cities would control a nationwide popular vote for president. In fact, 85% of the population of the United States lives in places with a population of fewer than 365,000.

Second is the myth that the Electoral College by design gives voice to rural America. While it is unlikely that the Founding Fathers were concerned about this issue, Mr. Dean’s comment about the current state winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes is well taken. In fact, rural areas are highly disadvantaged and small states are the most disadvantaged under that system. National Popular Vote would remove those disadvantages by changing that system.

Third is the myth that it would be better to allocate electoral votes using a fractional proportional approach. This would require a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College and the office of presidential elector. And while it would make every voter in every state politically relevant, in a close election, it would not guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes nationwide.

Consequently, I still believe that National Popular Vote is the best option on the table to ensure a fair, democratic presidential election.

Nancy Harcourt


Load comments