Gerrymandering The Electoral College

Dave Weigel:

Laura Olson reports on the happenings in Harrisburg, where Republicans now control all of the branches of government:

Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi is trying to gather support to change the state's "winner-takes-all" approach for awarding electoral votes. Instead, he's suggesting that Pennsylvania dole them out based on which candidate wins each of the 18 congressional districts, with the final two going to the contender with the most votes statewide.

In other reports, Pileggi sounds awfully sanguine about the effect this would have on PA as a swing state. Why even bring that up? Pennsylvania is typically a closely-divided state, and while it's gone Democratic in every election since 1992, it's been heavily campaigned-in every year.

So, let's pretend this is a totally political neutral decision. If the next Republican candidate breaks the streak and wins the state, it would be horrible for him -- he'd shed electoral votes. But if the president wins, he's down at least nine, possibly ten electoral votes, because congressional districting is slanted towards the GOP.

This strategy would also work in Ohio, with the currently proposed map.  This strategy would cost Obama 12 of Ohio's 18 electoral votes while weakening the Democratic vote in the cities like Toledo.  It is generally stealing votes, but I expect nothing less of the Republicans, especially considering how similar the ruling Republicans' actions have been in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.  Before taking such an action under the dramatically gerrymandered districts currently proposed, we should get rid of the electoral college completely and just use a popular vote.