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

Skip to comments.

California devises end-run around electoral college (Passed!)
CoCoTimes ^ | 5/28/06 | Jim Sanders

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 ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: ab2948; callegislation; electionpresident; electoralcollege; popularvote
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-293 next last
To: WOSG
If you take away the Electoral College, you take away the containment of voter fraud. No matter how many illegals vote in California, the Democrat only gets 55 Electoral Votes. If you take that boundary limit away, then the fraud itself in California can overwhelm the entire legitimate votes in some small states, throwing the popular vote the Democrat's way. Then, the other states in the compact give their Electoral Votes to the Democrat, regardless of the popular vote in their own state.

-PJ

221 posted on 05/31/2006 11:52:00 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

Exactly right...


222 posted on 05/31/2006 11:56:00 PM PDT by Uriah_lost (http://www.wingercomics.com/d/20051205.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: raygun
Yup, you get the idea.

Throw in: 1) special before-school voting for "subsidized breakfast" students, 2) Saturday voting, we'll send a bus to pick you up, 3) Varsity, Band , and Cheerleaders vote on Tuesday; Math Club, Science Club, and Chess Club vote on Wednesday, and the situation becomes really clear.

-PJ

223 posted on 05/31/2006 11:57:50 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
... it's not clear to me that Gore won the popular vote in 00 ...

Gore had a clear-cut popular vote win in 2000. Certainly not a landslide, certainly not as decisive as W’s win in 2004, but Gore did win the popular vote.

I’m super serial!

224 posted on 06/01/2006 12:04:27 AM PDT by stillonaroll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

Yeah if they think they're going to have success going after Bush, they'll be going after Cheney twice as hard. Remember how we ended up with Gerald Ford (he's ok) but more importantly Nelson Rockefeller as VP. And of course Jimmy Carter in a big hurry thereafter.


225 posted on 06/01/2006 12:23:22 AM PDT by mhx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Umberg argues that California is at a severe disadvantage under the current "winner-take-all" system because its lopsided voter registration persuades presidential candidates from both parties to spend their campaign time -- and money -- in "battleground" states.

If the real intent was to make California relevant again, the simple solution would be for California to allocate electors the same way as Maine and Nebraska do-- two for the winner of the state, one for the winner of each congressional district.

While this method would hurt the DEMS in the short run by lessening the impact of multiple votes and other shenanigans in cesspools of corruption like San Francisco, Chicago or Philadelphia, it would enhance their chances in the long run by forcing them to run more moderate candidates with broader appeal.

226 posted on 06/01/2006 12:40:23 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (crime would drop like a sprung trapdoor if we brought back good old-fashioned hangings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

We have enough tyranny from these people as it is.


227 posted on 06/01/2006 1:15:55 AM PDT by Jezebelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Mark was here; stainlessbanner
"The Electoral College allowed smaller states to feel protected in joining a union with the larger ones. This was a condition of joining the union. If the deal is broken, should the states be free to leave the union? Just as a broken marriage vow is grounds for divorce."

Oh, no, a state can NEVER leave the Union. No matter if the Union lied or the SCOTUS simply changes the meaning of the Constitution, it's a contract that binds on you and your children, unlike any other contract you can sign, and doesn't bind the Federal Government to squat, unlike any other contract IT can sign. The Founders signed the lives of their progeny away, you see.


228 posted on 06/01/2006 1:31:12 AM PDT by LibertarianInExile ('Is' and 'amnesty' both have clear, plain meanings. Are Bill, McQueeg and the President related?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl; Non-Sequitur; lentulusgracchus

Oh, this can't be right. Non Sequitur told me interstate compacts aren't allowed.


229 posted on 06/01/2006 1:35:53 AM PDT by LibertarianInExile ('Is' and 'amnesty' both have clear, plain meanings. Are Bill, McQueeg and the President related?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

'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.'

How exactly did they turn the tables? By managing to lose the election again which the Dems did? The Dem legislature in CA is as stupid as it goes, it may not pass the senate and Arnold would most likely veto it.


230 posted on 06/01/2006 1:36:23 AM PDT by GregH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Doesn't the Electoral College system help ensure that the President represents the whole country? If the voters in a few heavily populated states could determine the outcome (because they would determine the popular vote) wouldn't Presidential candidates pander to urbanized areas and ignore rural states?
Welcome to a Democracy where every vote counts. Isn't it great! Not too much longer and 51% of the people will be able to vote out most of your basic unalienable rights.

In a Gramscian move calling our Republic a Democracy and convincing people that they're the same thing was the beginning of things. There is no "semantics" in the non-violent political overthrow of a government, which is exactly what has been happening for years.
As long as nobody in the public eye recognizes the Republic that we are things won't change.

Who is Antonio Gramsci? You Better Learn!!!

Deconstructing the Western Mind: Gramscian-Marxist Subversion of Faith and Education
The On-Going Marxist March Against The Western Mind

Why There Is A Culture War
Gramsci and Tocqueville in America

Power, in Gramsci’s observation, is exercised by privileged groups or classes in two ways: through domination, force, or coercion; and through something called "hegemony," which means the ideological supremacy of a system of values that supports the class or group interests of the predominant classes or groups. Subordinate groups, he argued, are influenced to internalize the value systems and world views of the privileged groups and, thus, to consent to their own marginalization.

231 posted on 06/01/2006 2:23:25 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile; BurbankKarl; lentulusgracchus
Oh, this can't be right. Non Sequitur told me interstate compacts aren't allowed.

Article I, Section 10, Clause 3: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, ...enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State..."

You might want to actually try reading the Constitution sometime. There are no pictures, but I'll be glad to help you with all the big words.

232 posted on 06/01/2006 3:34:18 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; BurbankKarl; lentulusgracchus
blah blah blah Non-Sequitur claims to read "Constitution," and ignores article showing how that provision is routinely ignored just as Libertarianinexile said, Non-Sequitur posts snide comment about it nonetheless...

And if YOU read the article above, you might note that these states ARE entering into a compact, and Congress isn't involved. Oh, no, it's unConstitutional! So is the notion of excluding jury rights in suits at common law where the value in controversy is over twenty dollars, but then, you'd never know that from the U.S. Supreme Court, either. Thank goodness we have you around to kiss their 'interpreting-a-living-document-might-makes-right' fannies.

233 posted on 06/01/2006 3:49:23 AM PDT by LibertarianInExile ('Is' and 'amnesty' both have clear, plain meanings. Are Bill, McQueeg and the President related?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
I'm not sure I see the problem with his point. What am I missing?

It was, and has been for many decades, a 7 game series

234 posted on 06/01/2006 3:57:39 AM PDT by tx_eggman (Islamofascism ... bringing you the best of the 7th century for the past 1300 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

It does look like he laid out the whole game plan of the western left. The distinction between democracy and republic isn't something we think about a lot in Canada -- now I see why it matters.


235 posted on 06/01/2006 4:00:08 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
If you take away the Electoral College, you take away the containment of voter fraud.

Exactly. For my vote to count now, I only have to ensure there is no massive vote fraud in my own state. But if this compact goes through, dead people in Chicago will be cancelling out my vote. Who needs that?

Besides, I still say that the State Legislatures of Massachusetts, New York and California are going to abrogate this agreement the first time they are forced to cast a vote for a Republican. Such a move would be wildly popular with their constituents. They can see on which side their bread is buttered.

236 posted on 06/01/2006 4:02:42 AM PDT by jebeier (RICE '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
So what happens when the nationwide popular vote is only separated by a few thousand votes

THIS:


237 posted on 06/01/2006 4:02:45 AM PDT by Jim Noble (And you know what I'm talkin' 'bout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
Assemblyman Tom Umberg, a Santa Ana Democrat who chairs the Assembly Election and Redistricting Committee, said the basic premise is understandable even to children.

How is the electoral college any different from the best-of-seven championship games in major leage baseball, basketball or hockey? Why don't we simply add the scores of each game? Is it fair that a team that scores more points in the tournament still loses the series because they happened to lose more games?

There's another big leftist fallacy here. Leftists think you can raise taxes on the rich or on the corporations or some other evil type, but these groups won't alter their behaviour because of the tax. They obviously think the same for the electoral college. Go back to the election of 2000. Do you think that if it had been a popular vote winner-take-all system, that both Bush and Gore might not have altered their campaign strategies? Ad purchases would have been VERY different, appearances, get out the vote efforts, etc.

238 posted on 06/01/2006 4:28:21 AM PDT by Koblenz (Holland: a very tolerant country. Until someone shoots you on a public street in broad daylight...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
And if YOU read the article above, you might note that these states ARE entering into a compact, and Congress isn't involved.

Actually I did read it. Especially the part where the idea has been proposed. Not enacted, not voted on, just proposed. And if they try to place their proposal into action, especially where other states are involved, then they'll need Congressional approval before it can be enacted. Just like the Constitution says. Or hadn't you made it that far?

239 posted on 06/01/2006 4:32:31 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
Article I, section 10.

Unconstitutional.

240 posted on 06/01/2006 4:37:49 AM PDT by Jim Noble (And you know what I'm talkin' 'bout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-293 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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