Actually, this is how the system has always worked - electors were originally devised to allow the electors to use their own initiative when choosing who they should cast their EV for. Some states have put fines to dissuade electors from voting for someone other than the winner of the state, but it's still legal, AFAIK. This is hardly the first time it' happened - there's a history of electors abstaining or changing their vote going all the way back to the 18th century, I believe. In 2000, for example, one of Gore's electors abstained from voting. IIRC, in 1988, one of the electorss for Dukakis switched the Pres and VP tickets when voting. And in 1976(?) one of electors voted for Reagan instead of Ford.
Not that this will matter. IIRC, the elector said he wouldn't vote for Kerry either. Which means there's no situation where the outcome would switch. eg, if the election ended Bush 270-Kerry 268, it would become Bush 269-Kerry 268 and if it was Bush 269-Kerry 269 it would become Bush 268-Kerry 269. In both cases, the election would go to the house, where Bush would almost undoubtably win.
