Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Perspective: amendment 36 NO: We'd be insignificant
The Denver Post ^ | 9/26/04 | Eric Sondermann

Posted on 09/29/2004 4:53:03 PM PDT by mondoman

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: fooman; Restorer; mondoman; blanknoone
EC is winner take all, except maine. IF the plan passes bush only gets +1 net in the EC college.

If the plan passes, expect a court challenge. It violates both the US Constititution and federal election law. Read post #20.

21 posted on 09/29/2004 8:02:56 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Dan Rather's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

While I don't doubt it would be challenged, and I don't think it would apply to the current election (I think the leftists are more interested in nuetralizing CO in the future), it is also far from clear that it is unConstitutional. The 'in such manner as the Legislature' language could very easily include the referendum process...that process was created by the legislature.


22 posted on 09/29/2004 8:13:55 PM PDT by blanknoone (Red + Yellow = Orange)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Hey Komrade those silly 'laws' you site are for thee, not me.


23 posted on 09/29/2004 8:17:00 PM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mondoman

Colorado has 9 EVs now, so unless someone gets a large margin, it'll split 5-4 or 4-5, so only 1 EV is at stake. If, however, in the next census, Colorado gets one more EV, then it'll almost always split 5-5. So it would be utterly meaningless for anyone to campaign there unless they thought they could exceed 55%.


24 posted on 09/29/2004 8:23:16 PM PDT by Koblenz (Not bad, not bad at all. -- Ronald Reagan, the Greatest President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blanknoone; Congressman Billybob; mondoman
While I don't doubt it would be challenged, and I don't think it would apply to the current election (I think the leftists are more interested in nuetralizing CO in the future), it is also far from clear that it is unConstitutional. The 'in such manner as the Legislature' language could very easily include the referendum process...that process was created by the legislature.

I read in an article last night on MSNBC's website (Split Colorado's electoral votes? [ballot question leads 51% - 31% - 18%] Below is a quote from that article specifically stating that the amendmen retroactively changes the law governing the 2004 Electoral College. This is a violation of US election law.

Given some Americans' puzzlement with the electoral mechanics that allow one candidate to receive the most votes nationwide and not win the electoral vote, one might expect that Colorado could be the harbinger of a national movement if the measure is approved by the voters.

But Atkinson is skeptical: She said only 16 states allow ballot initiatives and state legislators in the other states would not be likely to undertake electoral vote-splitting on their own.

If what the proponents were most concerned about was starting a national trend, Atkinson said, "They could have made this take effect in 2008, instead of in this presidential election. Or they could also have put a trigger in that said it took effect in Colorado after a certain number of the states adopted. Colorado would have been on the leading edge, but would not put itself at a huge disadvantage."

You should direct questions about the constitutionality of state legislatures delegating powers when the US Constitution specifies legislature to Congressman Billybob; he is a civil rights lawyer. According to previous posts he has written to me, there are Supreme Court decisions restricting such delegations of power.

25 posted on 09/29/2004 8:27:25 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Dan Rather's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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