Released from Soapblox/Chicago
From Eric Zorn's weblog Change of Subject and his pun-tacular Land of Linkin' comes a pointer to FairVote's Who Picks the President.
It should come to noone's surprise that nearly 75% of all money spent on television advertising during the 2004 presidential election was in only five states. Nor should it surprise anyone that more than 75% of that was spent in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Would it surprise you that more money was spent on television advertising in Florida than in 45 other states and the District of Columbia combined?
Pie graphs and analysis after the jump.
Illinois was one of 24 states who did not see any television ads during the 2004 presidential election. It was also one of 28 states that did not receive a visit during the campaign. That made it one of 19 that did not receive any attention at all. (Illinois was the second most populous to achieve this distinction after Texas).
Comparing the amount spent for TV ads in a state to that state's population returns a price per vote of over $10 in New Mexico and Nevada with Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania at $8.45, $8.40, and $6.38 respectively. In Illinois (and 23 other states) the price was $0.
These numbers aren't even the half of it. Go take a look for yourself at the inordinate amount of attention that was spent on such a relatively small portion of the electorate. The time has come for the government to take a long look at the electoral college and to begin to rectify the inequities that it creates.
See also the article by Chris Pearson and Ryan O'Donnell at TomPaine.com, The Shrinking Battleground.