Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California`s illegitimate 55 electoral college votes!
9/23/2012 | johnwk

Posted on 09/23/2012 1:57:55 PM PDT by JOHN W K

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

1 posted on 09/23/2012 1:58:02 PM PDT by JOHN W K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

Isn’t the electoral college based on population ?


2 posted on 09/23/2012 2:10:24 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

And West Virginia only pays in $3599.24 per capita and has 5 Electoral Votes and Mississippi only pays in $3723.71 per capita and has 6 Electoral Votes.


3 posted on 09/23/2012 2:11:58 PM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf
Isn’t the electoral college based on population ?

Only indirectly. he number of members of the college from a state equals the number of congressional districts plus two (for the Senate spots). So the minimum number is three.
4 posted on 09/23/2012 2:13:19 PM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("I have a new zest for life!"--Calvin from Las Vegas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
So, that IS, sort'a .. population.

What's this article about ?

5 posted on 09/23/2012 2:14:36 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

I had no idea that the Constitution dictated that electoral votes be apportioned among the states on the basis of per capita federal taxes. Who knew?


6 posted on 09/23/2012 2:16:03 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Electoral college is based on the sum of number of representatives and Senators. Congress representatives are based on population.

Of course the constitution was amended to permit an income tax. Of course the constitutional government before that never collected direct taxes (taxes from states) in a meaningful way, funding most of the government by tariff income or from sales of land, neither of which was related to population


7 posted on 09/23/2012 2:21:37 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

I thought California and the other solidly Leftist states had pledged to stop assigning electoral votes on an all or nothing basis.


8 posted on 09/23/2012 2:22:41 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

My household paid over $50,000 in taxes last year, that works out to be over $16,000 per capita. I don’t have any Electoral Votes.


9 posted on 09/23/2012 2:25:05 PM PDT by So Cal Rocket (Task 1: Accomplished, Task 2: Hold them Accountable!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

Assuming there are 30 million illegals in America, that’s enough to create some 50 congressional districts and they don’t even need to vote to do it. If they do vote, you can pretty much count on those districts being almost exclusively democrat. As it is we don’t know how many districts exist almost wholly due to the presence of illegals.

The costs of administering a single district must run into the millions. How much pork can a district seek? How many earmarks? What will all those new democrat congressmen vote for?

If you think Obamacare is bad, you haven’t seen squat. Wait till the day all those democrats start dictating how many cars a family can have, what job you can have, or where you can live. Wait till they dictate that all paychecks come from government and you get a small cut of what is left over.

Illegals are nothing but government growth hormone and amnesty today is nothing short of treason.


10 posted on 09/23/2012 2:25:40 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K
By your numbers, California pays 66.5 times more in federal taxes than Wyoming.

Why then shouldn't California have 66.5 times more weight in elections than Wyoming, rather than the 18.3 times more it presently has?

<sarcasm>
I, for one, am tired of pulling more than my fair share of the weight so that a bunch of freeloading cowboys can have more representation in federal elections than I do.
</sarcasm>

11 posted on 09/23/2012 2:28:16 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

I always thought electoral college votes were related to the number of house members plus two (senators).

ECV have nothing to do with taxes paid.

I had though many states were going to proportional vote percentage to votes cast to decide ECVs.

California has been discussing doing this, but who knows the progress.


12 posted on 09/23/2012 2:34:10 PM PDT by svcw (If one living cell on another planet is life, why isn't it life in the womb?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Assuming there are 30 million illegals in America...

Let's compromise; count each illegal as 3/5 of a person.

13 posted on 09/23/2012 2:36:27 PM PDT by TexasKamaAina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Well, it did until the income tax, a direct form of taxation was classified as an indirect tax by the language of the 16th amendment.


14 posted on 09/23/2012 2:46:41 PM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

http://stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/

I am not sure where there data come from but this is about what I seen other places.

State Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes
New Mexico $2.03
Mississippi $2.02
Alaska $1.84
Louisiana $1.78
West Virginia $1.76
North Dakota $1.68
Alabama $1.66
South Dakota $1.53
Kentucky $1.51
Virginia $1.51
Montana $1.47
Hawaii $1.44
Maine $1.41
Arkansas $1.41
Oklahoma $1.36
South Carolina $1.35
Missouri $1.32
Maryland $1.30
Tennessee $1.27
Idaho $1.21
Arizona $1.19
Kansas $1.12
Wyoming $1.11
Iowa $1.10
Nebraska $1.10
Vermont $1.08
North Carolina $1.08
Pennsylvania $1.07
Utah $1.07
Indiana $1.05
Ohio $1.05
Georgia $1.01
Rhode Island $1.00
Florida $0.97
Texas $0.94
Oregon $0.93
Michigan $0.92
Washington $0.88
Wisconsin $0.86
Massachusetts $0.82
Colorado $0.81
New York $0.79
California $0.78
Delaware $0.77
Illinois $0.75
Minnesota $0.72
New Hampshire $0.71
Connecticut $0.69
Nevada $0.65
New Jersey $0.61

Should the states that receive less back than they get back back get more votes too.


15 posted on 09/23/2012 2:51:56 PM PDT by ThomasThomas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andyk

If you are referring to the poll tax, that was never a federal tax. Representation in Congress and constitution of the electoral college has always been by enumeration of persons in the federal census with free persons counting as one and slaves counting as 3/5. This, of course changed with the abolition of slavery. Taxes never figured into the calculus.


16 posted on 09/23/2012 2:51:56 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: knarf
The electoral votes are based on the combined number of representatives and senators. Representation is based on the number of legal American residents ~ so no illegals in there, no foreign military personnel in training, no diplomats, no tourists ~

Which means the voting is a bit more democratic than the US Senate.

17 posted on 09/23/2012 2:57:49 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: svcw

There’s always talk and then someone will realize that the state would be foolish to agree to do something other states aren’t doing.


18 posted on 09/23/2012 3:00:20 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

No, I’m just making the futile case that the income tax is a direct tax, that was made constitutional by the 16th amendment, which placed it in the class of indirect taxes which need not be apportioned, ‘from which it never should have been removed’, or something like that.


19 posted on 09/23/2012 3:05:36 PM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JOHN W K

Apples? Meet oranges.


20 posted on 09/23/2012 3:07:28 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson