House to consider bill to eliminate Electoral College
House lawmakers will consider legislation today that could someday rid the state of the Electoral College system and put presidential elections more directly in the hands of voters.
Massachusetts would become the fifth state to join a movement toward switching to a popular vote, an initiative that would be implemented only if states representing a majority of the nation's 538 electoral votes approve similar legislation.
The plan would not affect the 2008 election and would not be put into place until 2012, at the earliest.
The House is planning to vote today, and the Senate will likely follow next week. Both House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi and Senate President Therese Murray support the idea, which makes its approval by the Legislature possible. Governor Deval Patrick has given it a tentative thumbs up, pending further study.
"It takes out the quirkiness and nuances that are so unfamiliar to many of the voters in this country," DiMasi said. "The votes that people cast, they're used to having the majority of people who vote for one candidate win . . . it's a fairer way of predicting who the winner would be, and people would be more inclined to vote."
Former governor Michael Dukakis also backed the idea Monday, sending a letter to legislators urging them to support a national popular vote.
"Under the current system, running for president means just one thing: Focus on the so-called swing states. I did it. Al Gore did it. John Kerry did it, and our Republican opponents did it, too," he wrote. "A big turnout in Massachusetts and many other states is irrelevant to winning the election."
Proponents of a popular vote system say that the current system is confusing and causes candidates to focus most of their attention on a handful of battleground states. If the election were decided by an overall popular vote, they say, it would open the race up more and candidates would spend time across the country.
They also argue that it would prevent a candidate from winning the presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide, which occurred three times in the 19th century, as well as in the 2000 election, which has become a rallying cry for the overhaul being pushed most aggressively by Common Cause, a nonprofit government watchdog.
"With the current system a state that is most definitely going to go Democratic or Republican, the candidates spend very little time in those states, including Massachusetts," said Representative James B. Eldridge, an Acton Democrat who supports the measure. "That's disappointing. The value of a vote in a swing state like Ohio is worth a lot more than a vote in Massachusetts."
The maneuver would essentially trump the Electoral College, since each state would pledge all of its electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote.
Critics say the change could result in quirky situations in which a state like Massachusetts, which has voted overwhelmingly Democratic, would pledge its votes to a Republican president.
"If this was in place in 2004, despite John Kerry getting nearly 70 percent of the vote, ours would have voted for George Bush despite the sense that Massachusetts voters would have had," said Representative William M. Straus, a Mattapoisett Democrat and chief critic of the legislation.
Straus also contends that if the Electoral College system should be dismantled for a popular vote, then the US Constitution should be amended.
"If you want to amend the constitution, do it. Get the two-thirds support and send it to the states," Straus said. "You're doing an end run around the constitution by still having the Electoral College."
The US Constitution leaves it up to each state to decide how to allot its electoral votes. Every state except Maine and Nebraska has a winner-takes-all system, by which all of the electors go to whatever candidate wins the popular vote in the state.
The legislation has been approved in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. Those states have 50 electoral votes, or 19 percent of the 270 needed to bring the law into effect. With Massachusetts' 12 electoral votes, that would move to 23 percent.
Patrick also supports the idea but said he wanted time to study the proposal before fully endorsing it.
"There's a lot of reason to concern ourselves about continuing the Electoral College system in the society we have right now," Patrick said. "The objective sounds right, to make sure that every vote should count."
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com. 