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 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-293 next last
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

That is what they are hoping for...I think 2/3rds of the states need to pass the law....


21 posted on 05/31/2006 3:20:19 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette

Fax Tom Umberg

(916) 319-2169 fax


22 posted on 05/31/2006 3:20:48 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
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

Bad analogy. Either these politicians are completely ignorant, or they are banking that the voters are.

23 posted on 05/31/2006 3:23:02 PM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior; Brad's Gramma

well, he does represent Santa Ana....more voters there will cast ballots in the Mexico elections than the US races.


24 posted on 05/31/2006 3:23:46 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
A fair system would be to have the electoral vote for each congressional district go the the winner of that district and then have the two state votes go to the overall winner of the state.
25 posted on 05/31/2006 3:24:08 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mark was here
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.

The States are supposed to be guaranteed a republican form of government. Looks like a deal-breaker to me.

26 posted on 05/31/2006 3:24:42 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
Unconstitutional. Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution:
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

27 posted on 05/31/2006 3:25:07 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

The Dems are just banking on the 12 million new citizens they hope to amnestize....they are located mostly in large cities.


28 posted on 05/31/2006 3:25:54 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

It would have been kind of funny to watch them throw their votes to Bush in 2004. I'll bet that if they pass it, and they have to give the votes to a Republican in a close race in 2008, it will be rescinded in the next legislative session.


29 posted on 05/31/2006 3:26:58 PM PDT by sig226
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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.
"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.

Well, he certainly proves his implicit premise. Trouble is he's a grownup, not in first grade.
First of all our country is not a first-grade class.
Secondly, first-grade classes do not consist of free independent states agreeing to join a Republic, a concept that takes a little more sophistication to understand than can be found in the first grade.

I would go on and into the importance of a limited central government, a concept too "grown up" politically, economically and socially, for Umberg and his classmates. Suffice to say that, during the founding of our country, the electoral system was argued at length, and has been with us 203 years for very important reasons.

If those reasons are no longer valid, let the second graders of the country try to fix it the proper way: through a Constitutional Amendment.

30 posted on 05/31/2006 3:27:02 PM PDT by Publius6961 (Multiculturalism is the white flag of a dying country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
So I guess we should select as the winner of baseball's World Series whichever team scores the most runs that year, regardless of which team wins the playoffs.

Yeah - Mr. Umberg is probably right. Since we teach our school children it's all about "feeling good" and "fairness means equal results, not equal opportunity", and since we teach them next to nothing about our constitution and form of government, most children in our public schools probably would think this way about our elections.

And yes, Mr. Umberg is applying first grade logic to this situation, with a manifest inability to read, understand and honor the Constitution that one would expect of a five year old.

What ever happened to following the damn rules, sir?

From The Constitution of the United States Article I, Section 10:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Such utter disregard for our Constitution is disgusting.

31 posted on 05/31/2006 3:27:29 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (We are but Seekers of Truth, not the Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Picking away at the basis of the country. One little thing here, one little thing there.

You nailed it.

When I read that headline, I thought about how yesterday in Brookline, Massachusetts the town meeting voted to call for the impeachment of the President.

In this article, someone talks about a first-grade vote and the one with the most votes wins.

There is a tussle going on about English being our official language.

These three are greater indications of something going on that's more important in the long run than the immigration debates.

The reason something like 9-11 was so destructive was because some individuals chose to go outside the accepted methods of civilisation. DUmmies and Michael Moore types have, oddly enough, used a similar approach (I don't mean breaking the law, I mean deciding that they don't want to work through the system).

The whole idea of a civil society is NOT that we will all be happy about how things go all the time; it's that we all agree that the way we organize society is the way we will abide by. You don't work the system and at the end of the day, if a ruling, for example, doesn't go your way, you suddenly say "I still want to win" and blow up the court house.

This kind of thing shows that this nation is splintering badly.

I am a huge fan of the president's--I've been called a Bushbot--but I think it is undeniable that he is not a respected leader to a large number of people in this country. If we had a "no confidence" vote, he would be out.

In previous years we would just sail along until 2008 and put someone in we or they would prefer.

But now? November 2006 is their target date. It is their sole concern: getting into power and getting rid of Bush. It doesn't matter that Cheney will become president because they don't care, they're not thinking that far ahead, they just want to GET the President.

I have often called people on being hysterical about this or that on this site, but this kind of thing is increasing. States that have one-party rule are looking at the rest of the country and thinking "I don't want to be associated with THOSE people."

Balkanization is inevitable in a nation where there is no common ethnicity, no common religion, no common language, and no agreement that the system itself will be the arbiter of disputes.

32 posted on 05/31/2006 3:27:48 PM PDT by Darkwolf377 (All Hail Buah The Wasp Killer!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

There is no way this will ever happen people.

33 posted on 05/31/2006 3:28:52 PM PDT by bahblahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1
which must be why dims are so fond of this idea

"Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it." - Zapp Branigan, Futurama

34 posted on 05/31/2006 3:30:43 PM PDT by ThinkDifferent (Chloe rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
"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.

Was it unfair that the Pittsburg Pirates won the 1960 World Series 5 games to 4 when the New York Yankees scored 55 runs and the Pirates just 27 runs over the course of the 9 games of the series? Or is that just the way the system works -- and is supposed to work?

35 posted on 05/31/2006 3:30:48 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Yup - you beat me to it - guess I spent too much time composing my fancy reply <grin>.
36 posted on 05/31/2006 3:30:49 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (We are but Seekers of Truth, not the Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
"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.

Maybe Madison, Franklin, and the boys knew something that most first-graders (and this schmuck) don't ?

NL/NJ

37 posted on 05/31/2006 3:32:03 PM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

And when a republican gets the popular vote and not a democrat,the democrats will revert to the electorial college and site the constitutional reqirement.


38 posted on 05/31/2006 3:32:13 PM PDT by chainsaw (We are going to take things away from you-H. Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
well, he does represent Santa Ana....more voters there will cast ballots in the Mexico elections than the US races.

The amigos in Santa Ana proudly vote in both.

39 posted on 05/31/2006 3:32:58 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Good one!
40 posted on 05/31/2006 3:33:25 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (We are but Seekers of Truth, not the Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 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