Electoral Reform Solutions
The Electoral College
A delegate system used to elect the President of the United States. Conceived as a compromise during the Federal Convention of 1787, it gave a population bonus to the southern slave states by allocating electors based on representation in Congress. With the three-fifths compromise already in place, the southern slave states could benefit from their slave population. Of course, the direct election of the president would have eliminated the slave population and reduced the political power of the southern slave states. With ratification in the balance, the EC was "the substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections? (Madison, Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Thursday, July 19th)
Solutions
AMEND THE CONSTITUTION
The Electoral College could be abolished with an amendment to the US Constitution. Article V puts forth the amendment process. There are two ways. The first is through Congress. Two-thirds of the House and Senate must approve of the proposal. It is then sent to the state legislatures and three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.
The second method requires a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States. That Convention can propose as many amendments as it deems necessary. Those amendments must be approved by three-fourths of the states.
THE NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE INTERSTATE COMPACT (NPVIC)
An agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who wins the most popular votes is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome. As of January 2019, it has been adopted by eleven states and the District of Columbia.
Gerrymandered Safe Seats
A form of election rigging. Congressional districts are drawn to give an advantage to one political party over the other.
As a result, up to 90 percent of Congressional seats are not competitive. This means that the incumbent is predetermined to win. This depresses voter turnout and leaves everyone outside of the dominant party with no pathway to meaningful representation.
Solutions
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
Instead of single-member districts and winner-take-all elections, multi-seat districts with representatives elected by Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) aka Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), the outcome would be proportional, and district boundaries be irrelevant.
NON-PARTISAN REDISTRICTING COMMISSIONS
Rather than leaving redistricting in the hands of a partisan majority in the state legislature, a non-partisan commission may be used.
Currently, 21 states have some form of non-partisan or bipartisan redistricting commission.
In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission that redistricting commissions such as Arizona's, whose redistricting commission process is independent of the state legislature, were constitutional.
Winner-Take-All Vote Allocation
A Plurality voting system. Winner-Take-All vote allocation prevents alternative political parties from becoming viable and maintains the two-party duopoly.
Solution
RANKED CHOICE VOTING
Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) aka Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) requires the winning candidate to receive a majority of the votes. Voters rank their choices and if no candidate wins 50 % plus 1 on the first ballot, an instant runoff occurs.
Disproportionate Representation
The House of Representatives
As a result of the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, the House of Representatives is capped at 435. As population grows and shifts, representation in the House is not distributed equally.
Wyoming has 1 Congressperson for a population of 577,737 citizens, while California's 53 Congresspeople each represent over 740,000 citizens. Texas has 36 representatives, with each representing close to 800,000 citizens. Montana has only one representative t represent its entire population of 1,062,305.
The Senate
With each state receiving two Senators, regardless of population, the Senate is inherently undemocratic. This equal allocation of political power in the upper house was a purposeful compromise designed to balance the control of the national government between the low-population states and the large-population states.
Article V of the Constitution contains a clause that shields the first clause of Article I, Section 3, which provides for equal representation of the states in the Senate, from being amended. Therefore, it is unlikely that this small state political power bonus will remain, which it can be argued, would be fine if this power bonus didn't also skew the Electoral College. How much of a bonus should the low-pop states get?
Solutions
THE "WYOMING RULE"
There are several ways to bring proportionality to the House of Representatives. All would increase the number of members in the House.
A proposal to increase the size of the United States House of Representatives so that the standard representative-to-population ratio would be that of the smallest entitled unit, which is currently Wyoming. Under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, each U.S. state is guaranteed at least one representative. If the disparity between the population of the most and least populous states continues to grow, the disproportionality of the House will continue to increase unless the House (whose size has been fixed at 435 since 1913) is expanded.
A total of 568 House seats would have been required to implement the Wyoming Rule based on the 2000 Census results. However, the decade leading up to the 2010 United States Census saw Wyoming's population increase at a greater rate than that of the U.S. as a whole; as a result, the required House size to implement the Wyoming Rule was reduced to 545.
Felony Disenfranchisement
Currently, 6.1 million Americans cannot vote because they have a felony conviction on their record. Ten states withhold the right to vote from formerly incarcerated felons. In most of these states, there is a petition process to restore the right
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees "equal protection of the laws" to all persons. However, Section 2 of this Amendment allows states to remove voting privileges from anyone who has participated in "rebellion or other crime." A 1972 Supreme Court ruling found that this article applied to disenfranchisement of ex-felons. The Civic Participation and Rehabilitation Act, allowing for ex-felons to vote, has been introduced at the beginning of every legislative session since 1994, but has never made it to the floor of Congress.
Solution
REINSTATEMENT OF VOTING RIGHTS
In fourteen states and the District of Columbia, disenfranchisement ends after incarceration is complete: District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Utah.
In four states, disenfranchisement ends after incarceration and parole (if any) is complete: California, Colorado, Connecticut, and New York.
Twenty states require not only that incarceration/parole if any be complete but also that any probation sentence (which is often an alternative to incarceration) be complete: Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska (Completion of probation + 2 years; treason convicts permanently lose the right to vote), New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina,Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, West Virginia (the prosecutor can request the court to revoke voting rights if financial obligations are unmet), and Wisconsin.