The article "Candidates spend time in low-priority states" (Tribune, April 26) neatly sums up the problem with presidential elections: Whoever wins the popular vote in a state gets all the electoral votes for that state. Given this "winner take all" system, certain states are "irrelevant to their (Clinton and Obama's) strategies." According to the article, "roughly 14 competitive states . . . will decide the next president."

This is not a good way to elect our president. Every state should be a priority state. There should not be competitive and non-competitive states. Candidates should go everywhere in the country to reach out to voters. There's a different way. Instead of "winner take all," it's a setup where the candidate who wins the national popular vote becomes president.

Four states have already put it into effect (Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey and Illinois). A similar bill is gaining traction in the Utah Legislature. With hard work, a national popular vote will replace "winner take all" by 2012.

Utah can be in the forefront. When the "reddest" state passes such a bill, the rest of the country will take notice.

Jim Schnitter

Cottonwood Heights