Tom, you’re right about the NPV but wrong I think about the what did you call it? CEV. The two reasons why NPV is bad are that (A) it means vote fraud in the darkest, slimiest neighborhoods of Chicago can override legitimate votes made in every other city and state, and (B) that you KNOW the Democrats are going to sue to undo their agreement if the popular vote ever goes to a Republican. What is the “popular vote” anyway, if votes are counted differently or eligibility is different (i.e. do felons vote?) in different states. Seems like a state could “cheat” by having its state legislature choose its candidate, and give “all” the votes to their choice.
CEV on the other hand seems reasonable, and as you mention, my home state of Maine has been doing it for as long as I can remember with no problems. Your argument about pork is weak — every district has its own Congressman and each of them is already hard at work scooping up as much pork as they possibly can. The benefit of the CEV increases as voter fraud increases, and it is currently rampant in the big cities, anywhere Democrats gather. The CEV plan would be a fine way for Pennsylvanians in the rural districts to neutralize the ACORN-type ballot box stuffing that goes on in urban districts. (The urban districts are already a lock for the Democrat, so you’d reduce the impact of voter fraud to a practical zero.)
In terms of what’s best for the states and the people, it makes sense to me that “swing” states would want to vote as a block, so they can maximize their national clout, but states that are a lock for one party or another would be better off switching to a district-by-district system, so that the minority party is not forever exploited. Pennsylvania used to be a swing state, but we know it isn’t anymore.
