A version of this letter by Jen Panko was published in the Norwich Bulletin.
In its March 1 editorial, “Take the long route toward popular vote,” The Bulletin supported a constitutional amendment creating a system “in which the person with the most votes always wins” even though it recognizes it “may be near impossible.” It believes the National Popular Vote Compact, which guarantees the presidency to the winner of the popular vote, would “disconnect” voters from their electoral votes. It wouldn’t.
The Constitution says “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” Nothing about winner-take-all appears in the Constitution. Because Connecticut uses winner-take-all, the 673,215 voters who cast ballots for Donald Trump could have stayed home; they had no impact on the outcome. How did that “connect” Trump voters to anything?
The Bulletin suggests a better alternative is to allocate electoral votes in proportion to Connecticut votes cast for each candidate. Why does The Bulletin believe joining the compact is subversive but its alternative isn’t?
If you believe every vote cast for president should matter equally and the winner should be the candidate who receives the most votes, ask your state legislators to support H.B. 5434 to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.