But Libya was actually covered last night. Another topic, though not nearly as relevant to the election, went without attention. Had I been in the debate hall last night, I would have memorized and asked this:
Mr. President, Governor Romney, tonight is likely the only campaign-related appearance either of you will make here on Long Island, or anywhere in our state. The nature of the Electoral College skews the allocation of your campaigns' resources to a few states that are nearly evenly divided. Though the President plays no formal role in the Article V amendment process, if elected, would you lend the weight of your office to some kind of Electoral College reform - perhaps a national popular vote, nationwide application of the Maine-Nebraska Method, or something else?The Maine-Nebraska, or Congressional District method, was originally my first choice for a revised Presidential election method. Having looked at that Wikipedia article, proportionality by state might be a better way to go (while maintaining the present distribution of electors to each state). That would seem to eliminate the drawbacks of the winner-take-all method, while at the same time prevent state politicians from meddling in the system though gerrymandering and give third parties a credible shot, which the current system does not. Most importantly, it could give candidates some incentive to stump in states generally considered "safe" for the opposing party - and at the same time, provide the people of Ohio, Virginia, and Florida some much-needed relief from election fatigue.