CA: Innovator Devises Way Around Electoral College (Veto this Arnold!)

NEW YORK TIMES ^ | September 22, 2006 | Rick Lyman

[calcowgirl]

In his early 20’s, John R. Koza and fellow graduate students invented a brutally complicated board game based on the Electoral College ...

Now, a 63-year-old eminence among computer scientists who teaches genetic programming at Stanford, Dr. Koza has decided to top off things with an end run on the Constitution. He has concocted a plan for states to skirt the Electoral College system legally to insure the election of whichever presidential candidate receives the most votes nationwide.

The first fruit of his effort, a bill approved by the California legislature that would allocate the state’s 55 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, sits on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk. The governor has to decide by Sept. 30 whether to sign it ...

The brainstorm behind Dr. Koza’s effort, led by a seven-month-old group, National Popular Vote, was to abandon that approach and focus on creating interstate compacts. Those are contracts that bind states over issues like nuclear waste and port authorities.

Dr. Koza’s compact, if approved by enough legislatures, would commit a state’s electors to vote for the candidate who wins the most national votes, even if the candidate loses in that state.

“The bottom line is that the system has outlived its usefulness,” said Assemblyman Thomas J. Umberg, the Anaheim Democrat who sponsored the bill here. “It’s past time that Americans should elect their president by direct vote of the people.”

Mr. Umberg and his staff met some of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s top staff members on Wednesday and came away encouraged about the prospects of the legislation. Although they received no commitment, it was clear that the governor, a Republican, was seriously considering the question and had not made up his mind about it, Mr. Umberg said.

[Killborn]

When's the Constitutional Amendment where we decided to become a Third World "Democracy"?

Oh yeah, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!

Section III Article III their @$$.

[Cacique]

Looks like Chavez has been to California.

[GOP_Raider]

The brainstorm behind Dr. Koza’s effort, led by a seven-month-old group, National Popular Vote, was to abandon that approach and focus on creating interstate compacts new ways for Democrats to steal elections.

[dangus]

Since all of California's votes went to President Gore in 2000, the result would have been the same: President Bush winning despite losing the popular vote and every California elector. However, in 2004, the margin of victory for Bush would have been much larger, as he would have won not only Ohio, but California as well. The net effect of this would be three fold:

1. The Repubicans could ignore California in the general election.
2. The Republicans would never have to worry about an electoral college defeat, while the Democrats still would have to.
3. California would lose most of its clout.

I would oppose this move, but out of principle; it would benefit my party.

[Tzimisce]

Sounds awful to me...

[dangus]

No, it's perfectly legit. States can assign their electoral votes how they see fit. I believe a few states still permit an electoral district to award its vote to the winner of the majority of that district, even if the majority of the statewide vote goes the other way; there was some talk of Ross Perot picking up an electoral vote in Maine or Colorado, IIRC. It used to be quite common for states to divide their electoral vote, until they figured out that this divided their influence in presidential elections.

[Zetman]

“More important,’’ he said, “is changing the way presidential campaigns are conducted in this country. Now, the candidates spend almost all of their time in a handful of battleground states like Ohio and Florida and ignore the rest of the country. This would force candidates to campaign nationally for every vote.”

Sounds like "bull" to me. Who actually believes this stuff?? I would like to see a breakdown of where the greatest concentration of 50% of the U.S. population lives. I would suspect that it is in big cities, and if we started with the most populous big city, and worked our way down the list, I'll bet we wouldn't have to go too far until we had accounted for 50% of the U.S. population.

This means we would have the same problem that he describes above, only now condidates would campaign within a relatively small handful of large population centers, and ignore the rest of the country. Most states would probably never see a candidate, and even states like California would only see candidates campaigning in their big cities.

Furthermore, how do big cities tend to vote?? I would not be surprised to learn that the populations of big cities tend to vote more to the left than to the right. It seems that there is something about living in big cities that does something to people's collective IQ's.

This seems to be specifically designed to ensure more victories for liberals, and that Conservatives are shut out and marginalized. The fact that some RINO's are supporting it is meaningless window dressing. The "problems" described in the article could be made worse (unless your name is Al Gore). I hope that intelligent people stand up and put a stop to this.

[Killborn]

CAn state legislators alter the way Presidents are elected? I thought they can't.

[Killborn]

Thanks for the info. I thought it was illegal. If it were, it would be unConstitutional, thus treasonous.

I don't like the idea of contravening the EC, though. Our FFs were brilliant.

[frankensnake]

CAn state legislators alter the way Presidents are elected? I thought they can't.

That's the thing about this legislation--it doesn't alter the electoral college system as defined in the constitution. States hold their own elections for the Presidency and define how the electoral college votes are allocated. Almost all states do winner take all, except for Maine I think, which allocates the electoral college votes by congressional district.

[Killborn]

Thank you.

Every time I hear "changing the EC" I cringe because I know exactly what's coming.

[bahblahbah]

"Dr. Koza’s compact, if approved by enough legislatures, would commit a state’s electors to vote for the candidate who wins the most national votes, even if the candidate loses in that state."

Article 1 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."

It's not going to happen, as you have to get congressional approval if there is compact between states. Regardless, if Schwarzenegger signs this, then I will quit the Republican party and become an anarchist.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

"if Schwarzenegger signs this, then I will quit the Republican party and become an anarchist."

If Arnold signs this, HE has quit the (R) party. Don't join him and this bill's author/supporters in anarchy...

[bahblahbah]

No, he and his supporters will lead us to statism, not anarchy.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

agreed, but the anarchists pave the way....while Teddy is trying to pave Arnold's way.

[D-fendr]

yeah, this system works just great in Canada.

a couple of big cities elect the government, everyone else sucks hind mammary.

[goldfinch]

The net effect of this would be three fold:

1. The Repubicans could ignore California in the general election.

2. The Republicans would never have to worry about an electoral college defeat, while the Democrats still would have to.

3. California would lose most of its clout.

I would oppose this move, but out of principle; it would benefit my party.

What you are missing is that the law would not take effect until states representing 270 electoral votes passed the same law.

What this does is get rid of the Electoral College without a Constitutional Amendment. The Electoral College, which was part of the large state/small state compromises, protects the small states from being overwhelmed by large states.

If you value the Constitution, come from a small state, or are a conservative, this measure is a danger to you...and IMO, it is a danger to our country.

[Exton1]

Dr. John R. Koza
Third Millennium Venture Capital Limited
Box 1123
Los Altos, California 94023 USA
FAX: 650-941-9430
URL at Stanford University: http://www.smi.stanford.edu/people/koza/
E-Mail at Stanford University: koza@stanford.edu