Just for fun assuming nationwide application of this approach for the past election
it would have resulted in the following: Anyone please correct if I made a miscalculation.
Party Divisions — US House, 2013
233 Republicans
200 Democrats
0 Independents
2 Vacancies — democrat
3 Washington DC EC votes — democrat
States Popular Vote X 2 for Senators (100)
26 X 2 = 52 — Democrat
24 X 2 = 48 — Republican
Total — 538 EC Votes
GOP — 281 (233 House, 48 Senator)
DEM — 257 (205 House, 52 Senator)
This would have to have all states using the allocation
method and that isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
The way to cause the other party to support a national shift is by first shifting the battleground states that we control.
Think asymmetric.
Then, the other side will see that they can reduce their disadvantage by shifting all the states.
In the long run, I’m not sure this favors one party over the other. It favors the party that controls the majority of state governments (which, right now, is us), since the states control re-districting.
And I think that’s a good thing.
Let’s do something restore the balance between our state governments and our national government.