Posted on 10/12/2004 6:59:20 PM PDT by cc4851
Proportional split of electoral votes on Colorado ballot
DENVER — The presidential candidate who wins a majority of the vote in Colorado next month could take all nine of the state's electoral votes, or he could take five.
It all depends on the outcome of Amendment 36, a state ballot measure that would make Colorado the first state in the nation to split its electoral votes proportionally, replacing the state's winner-take-all system.
Amendment 36 was written to take effect this year, which means its effect would be felt immediately. That means, for example, that even if President Bush wins a majority of the vote, Sen. John Kerry still could snare as many as four electoral votes.
Such a division would have prevented either presidential candidate from garnering the required 270 electoral votes in 2000, sending the election to the House of Representatives. A similar split also could determine the outcome in this year's close race, a detail not lost on national politicos, who will be watching the vote on Amendment 36 closely.
Coloradans will accept or reject the measure on Nov. 2, the same day as the presidential vote.
...
"Right now, if you're a Republican in California or a Democrat in Texas, your vote is ignored," Ms. Brown said.
Opponents also see the proportional system as a plot to weaken the clout of the so-called "red" Republican-leaning states. They note that Amendment 36 wasn't homegrown, but was the brainchild of J. Jorge Klor de Alva, a wealthy Californian who has contributed almost $700,000 to the measure.
...
Two states, Maine and Nebraska, have a proportional system that divvies votes according to the outcome of the presidential race by congressional district.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Personally, it sounds like a lame brain attempt by the Democrap to steal the election by getting Proportional votes in Bush States...so that they can get votes even from states they're gonna lose.
If this does end up in the Supreme Court [as I doubt its even legal under the constitution,] it could be what they use to tarnish the 2nd Bush Presidency. If they can make it so as that Kerry wins under this system, whereas Bush would have normally won...and then it went to SCOTUS who decides the law is unconstitutional, they would be claiming [once again] for the next 4 years that Bush stole the election and was appointed by SCOTUS.
Posting # 17,000,000,000,000 of this story....
Current polls show this measure failing miserably and the best named 527 ever, Coloradans against a Really Dumb Idea are campaigning against it....
but those solid Dem states will never do this - that's the whole idea.
is our side running any ads against this measure?
this would allow soros to acually buy and election ....... and the dems wouldnt have to leave new england to win the presidency...
jezz.... who let this in ......
It's a really dumb move. What's happened here is that the liberals have outsmarted the moderates. The moderates are going to vote for this, thinking that it is only fair, when in fact, it substantially weakens the influence of CO in Presidential politics. Once this is in place, no candidate will bother going to CO, or trying to influence the vote their, unless it will make a huge difference in the popular vote. Otherwise, it will have at most a negligible effect on the electoral vote.
technically speaking, this violates federal law. Rules for the election are suppose to be established prior to the election.
This proposal is running behind in Colorado polls - by 8 points or so. (posted on FR).
There are 2 states that split electoral votes already. They are Maine and Nebraska. The votes are split by who wins the congressional districts within the state. Maine and Nebraska have limited their impact on the election and the odds of presidential candidate visiting their state is zero. That would be the same if Colorado follows the same path. They are crazy if they vote to do it.
That said I don't see how you can vote an election rule change that would take effect the same day as it is voted on.
Agreed. But if passed, it poses this elections Florida legal broohaha, which is the intent.
According to the Constitution it's up to the states how they deal with their electors. But Always Right is...well..right - you can't make the change effective on the same election in which it's considered.
Which in some people's minds would not be a bad thing.
Section. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:
According to the Constitution, it's up the the states' legislatures to determine how they deal with their electors. So really, even is there is a referendum, the legislature can still do what it wants even if the referendum changes the state constitution.
If Bush wins the electoral vote with less than a five-vote margin, and this referendum measure gets a majority vote, expect the 'Rats to try to litigate their way into the White House again.
It's better for the other 49. Fewer states to compete with.
Possibly. But it will have to make a difference in the result. I will tell you, though, that if it passes, it passes. The courts are not going to overturn it.
A state can split its electoral votes under the Constitution, but there will be a constitutional challenge if this amendment passes.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides in part:
The issue is whether Colorado can make this change in the way that electors are selected by vote of the people or whether it can only be accomplished by the Legislature. ;-)
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.