Careful what you wish for....
Posted on 08/26/2006 4:26:39 PM PDT by John Semmens
Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) has introduced legislation that would require that California’s 55 Electoral College votes be cast for the winner of the “American Idol” talent contest concluded closest to the date of the 2008 presidential election. “Few Americans know anything about and have little trust in the nominees of the two major parties,” said Bowen. “Polls show that Americans have a much greater interest in the ‘American Idol’ competition.”
California Republicans reportedly are torn between what they say is the “blatant unconstitutionality” of the proposal and the realization that it may not be worse than what’s happened the last two presidential election cycles. “Look, the last two presidential elections California’s electoral votes went for Gore and Kerry,” said Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks). “Considering who the Democrats are likely to nominate in 2008, who’s to say that a talented young singer would be a worse choice.”
(Excerpt) Read more at azconservative.org ...
Careful what you wish for....
How is this blatantly unconstitutional? It is a strange idea, but there is a difference between being a bad or silly idea and being unconstitutional. The Federal Constitution left the method of the selection of the Electors of the Electoral College completely up to the discretion of each individual state. If California wants to change its election law and throw its votes to some random person, its their right.
Its actually rather surprising that all of the Republicans aren't backing the Democrats support of this bill. Afterall, California almost certainly will lean to the Democrat candidate and thus giving California's electoral college's votes to a third party will make it more likely for a Republican to win. There is however the possibility that no candidate will receive a majority in the electoral college and thus the House will choose the President. In that case whoever controls the most state delegations in the House will win. (If the House chooses the President, Each state delegation gets one vote as called for by the XII Amendment).
Satire alert
You never know with California's state legislature.
It's blatantly unconsitutional as an interstate compact.
Does this have anything BUT downside for Dems? It's all the rage in deep blue states, whose electoral votes under the current system reliably go in the D column under the current rules. So if a D runs up a majority of the national popular vote, they get no bonus votes that they wouldn't have earned anyway on a state-by-state basis.
Fixated on Bush, they can't envison the possibility of an R ever again sweeping the nation. They can't remember 1988. Or 1984. Or 1980. Or 1972. Or even 2004. But they'll wake up one morning down the line to find that their own state's popular vote was overruled by the gigantic majorities Rudy rolled up in all those nasty red states, and their vote counted for less than nothing.
The crack in the pot is the fact that large and medium solid red states -- Texas, the West and the South -- will NEVER join their scheme, so there will never bee a pool of red state electoral votes to be siphoned off in the opposite direction.
The true swing states will never sign on, because their importance diminishes.
Small states both red and blue have no motivation to join.
So the only states putting chips on the table in this winner-take-all game are large and medium blue states. Some years, they'll lose. Some years, they'll break even.
Believe me, if it ever makes the ballot here in New York, I know I'll vote for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.