Robert Bennett writes in today's New York Times about the possibility of a tie in the Electoral College, an issue I have touched upon before. Bennett has a simple solution for this problem, adding another member to the Electoral College in order to increase its numbers to 539. He admits that such a solution would be imperfect:

Increasing the size of the college will not eliminate the possibility of recourse to the House. There could, for instance, be an abstention, as there was in 2000. But the size of the House is the only component of the Electoral College that can be changed without a constitutional amendment, and the relatively modest step of adding a single seat to the House would greatly reduce the chances of a tie.

I agree that this is probably the easiest solution. However, I think the country would be better served if in the event of a tie, the election was decided by the popular vote. Since in most cases, the winner of the popular vote also wins the Electoral College, it seems fitting that if the primary indicator of a winner is inconclusive, we should resort to the next most likely indicator.