Recently Colorado rejected an inituative which would have scrapped the winner take all plan for electoral votes. If it had passed, Colorado’s 9 electoral votes would have been split based on vote percentage of each candidate.
Personally I think this plan would have been a good thing. Take 3 states which are traditionally Democrat. New York (31 electoral votes), Illinois (21), and California (55). If a Democrat wins Los Angeles/San Francisco, Chicago, and NYC, they pretty much have have a lock on 107 votes (potentially almost 40% of the 270 votes needed to win a majority). It would make much more sense to break up the electoral votes on any state which reaches 20 or more electoral votes.
Take California. Bush probably rarely visited California because he could not overcome Kerry’s lead in LA and San Francisco. So the rest of the state didn’t matter. It could potentially help Democrats too. Texas’ 34 electoral votes could be split among a Democrat and a Republican. I realize that Texas went over whelmingly for Bush this time around, but splitting the vote could work very well with a non-Texan Republican.
I’m not so sure this would be put into place easily. I think it is upto each state who they distribute electoral votes. Since I’m pretty sure Illinois and New York’s leglislatures are controlled by Democrats, I doubt they would “fix” something that is in their favor.