Abstract
ObjectiveThe Electoral College methods improperly represent voters, and previous elections reveal numerous counties where the popular vote in said counties are not the same as the popular vote in the state. We test a novel method to engender increased fairness in Presidential elections.MethodsThe Hill-Huntington method was applied to apportion electoral votes to counties based on each county’s recent population size. The winner-take-all method was employed for each county.ResultsAnalyzing the 2000 and 2008 elections reveals the consistency of county-apportionment with those election outcomes. Regarding the 2016 election, county-apportionment reveals the significance of the disparity between the popular vote and Electoral College results. The method provides insight into the reason such disparity exists. Across all three elections, voter representation increased under county-apportionment.ConclusionCounty-apportionment increases voter representation and can be accomplished absent Constitutional amendment by reforming electoral methods at the state level.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
