Posted on 05/31/2006 3:09:09 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
Six years after Democrat Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency to Republican George W. Bush, there's a new move afoot in the California Legislature and other states to ensure that such things never happen again.
The linchpin is a proposed "interstate compact," designed to guarantee that presidents will be selected by popular vote, without amending the U.S. Constitution or eliminating the electoral college.
Assemblyman Tom Umberg, a Santa Ana Democrat who chairs the Assembly Election and Redistricting Committee, said the basic premise is understandable even to children.
"When you're in first grade, if the person who got the second-most votes became class leader, the kids would recognize that this is not a fair system," he said.
Umberg's Assembly Bill 2948, proposing such a compact, passed the Assembly's elections and appropriations committees on party-line votes, with Republicans opposed.
"We have a system that's worked effectively for more than 200 years," said Sal Russo, a GOP political consultant. "We probably should be very hesitant to change that."
John Koza, an official of National Popular Vote, which is pushing the proposal, said sentiment has not split along party lines in other states.
"I don't think anyone can convincingly put their finger on any partisan advantage," said Koza, a consulting professor at Stanford University.
Though Republicans disproportionately benefited from the electoral college in 2000, when Bush edged Gore despite getting 544,000 fewer votes, Democrats nearly turned the tables four years later.
(Excerpt) Read more at contracostatimes.com ...
Very astute observation.
Very good question. I should think the answer is yes. If the rats want another civil war, this is the way to do it. It's a deal-breaker.
How many people went home, in Florida, because the networks called the election for Gore and said it was over when the Panhandle still had an hour to go?
Yes.
Exactly, that is precisely the fallacy in saying that Gore "won" the Popular Vote. People's decisions were based on the rules that were in place at the time.
Not so insane. The states can award their electoral votes any way they want as long as its citizens agree to it. This is not something coming from a bunch of nuts. It is a very serious challenge to our electoral process supported by the NYT, Chicago Sun Times, Minneapolis Star Tribune, and others.
EVERY VOTE EQUAL: A State-Based Plan For Electing The President By National Popular Vote
That doesn't address the problem. The fact that states can choose their own electors isn't in dispute. It's whether they can ENTER INTO A COMPACT that says they will choose electors in a certain way WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL, which the constitution requires for ANY interstate compact, per Article I, Section 10.
True, yet you do not allow for evil intent...the dims for this popular vote are also against immigration reform, as well as against voter ID's...and they count on a dumbed down voter to not know why the Electoral College makes us a stronger union... the dims have a plan to subvert all that is good in america just to be in power...look at the elite in Mexico...yea that is the model we need
No offense, but what have you been smoking? This is an obvious power grab just like the gang of fourteen pulled. If this catches on, there will be hell to pay. Small red states will have no voice at all, and rats will win every presidential election from here on out. When considering the proposal in connection with voter demographics, it would completely undermine electoral choice.
But... if they are in power and can impeach the President and Vice President -- WHO is president then?-- ding, ding -- Nancy Pelosi!
Guaranteed.....only a Clinton could have come up with this idea.....
What they are pushing is for vote by mail. This allows them to call people and tell them who to vote for. Just fill it in and give it to your mailman. I believe WA state has already started it.
They don't address whether it is a federal civil right to have one's electors appointed if they win.
I can't see how the Civil Rights Acts could be met with any other construction, but judges are nothing if not creative.
I don't believe that Gore won the "legal", "citzens only" popular vote in 2000. You toss out the couple million or so illegally cast votes of illegal-aliens and non-citizens, then Bush wins the popular vote by about a million to a million and a half votes!!! We can thank the Motor-Voter law of 1993 (or 1994) for making it easy for illegal-aliens and non-citizens to register and vote in our elections.
It'll be cool when small red states refuse to sell food to the overpopulated liberal blue states. ;)
Our CITY has already started it -- we just had a recall and another important vote -- both by mail-in ballot, got a whopping 51% returned... people are even too lazy to fill it out, sign it and mail it back.
Yeah well we don't let first graders vote in Presidential elections for just that reason -- they lack discernment.
I thought FEDERAL elections were just that - FEDERAL. How can a state change federal election laws ..??
This has me baffled.
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.