Measure Could Keeps Dems From The White House (Dems Panicked Over Hiltachk Initiative Alert)

Inside The Bay Area ^ | 09/03/2007 | Frank Davies

[goldstategop]

ASHINGTON — A proposed ballot initiative to change how California casts its mother lode of 55 electoral votes is far from passage, but it's already shaking up national politics because it could derail the Democrats' bid to recapture the White House.

A GOP lawyer in Sacramento is pushing the measure that would allocate the state's electoral votes by congressional district instead of winner-take-all. Depending on your perspective, that's either a step toward election reform or a backdoor attempt to tilt the 2008 election to Republicans.

The political math is compelling. In 2004, Democrat John Kerry captured 54.3 percent of the state's popular vote, giving him all of the state's 55 electoral votes — more than a fifth of the 270 needed to win. If the other system had been in effect, President Bush would have won 22 of those votes by carrying 22 districts.

"This would have a huge impact if it passes. It would be like winning the state of Ohio for the Republicans," said Tony Quinn, co-editor of the California Target Book, a nonpartisan analysis of state politics. Ohio, a key swing state, has 20 electoral votes.

Paperwork for the initiative was filed last month by Thomas Hiltachk, an election lawyer who worked on the recall campaign of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and whose firm represents the state Republican Party. Kevin Eckery, a spokesman for the initiative, said the issue is fairness. "People care about what happens to their vote," Eckery said. "Counting electoral votes by congressional district is a better way and reflects the state's diversity."

All states except Maine and Nebraska allocate votes in a winner-take-all system like California's.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats are panicked over a proposed ballot initiative. "Its a Republican theft," they holler. 20 measly electoral votes stand between them and the White House. And here come the Republicans to upset the proverbial Electoral College apple cart!

[johnny7]

Keeps them out!

[stylin19a]

RNC should be figuring out to get this initiative working in ALL states that do not already have it.
Get the ball moving, make the Rats play defense, keep ‘em busy and make ‘em use up tons of money...

[NonValueAdded]

Is there an analysis out there that recaps past elections assuming that rule were in effect nationwide? IIRC two states do that now, one vote going to the winner for each Congressional District and the winner of the popular vote getting the two “Senatorial” EV’s.

[Mrs.Z]

Not so fast.

We better do the math.

Texas and Florida, for example, (a bigger % than we may like going to the dims.)

[Congressman Billybob]

Now,ca competent reporter would know and include the facts that a total of 21 states have used the District Election methodology over the centuries. And that this was the preferred method early in the nation's history, and favored by Thomas Jefferson.

A REALLY good reporter would have found a four-year-old article in Contingencies, the Journal of the American Academy of Actuaries, which analyzed the more democratic nature of District Elections compared to winner-take-all elections. Not a lot of people know about that article. (I know about it, because I wrote it. LOL.)

Congressman Billybob

Latest article, "Enemies of America, in a Courtroom Near You"

[109ACS]

I don’t think this is a good idea. This is just the first step down a slippery slope to a time when the popular vote will elect the president. It may seem like a good idea now, but this could set us up for a nightmare scenario where a few maga-cities like New York and L.A. will have all the power in electing a president. Never mind this whole idea is likely unconstitutional.

[Congressman Billybob]

See post #6. Yes, that analysis has been done.

John / Billybob

[goldstategop]

Actually Bush carried about 53% of the congressional districts during the last two elections. If the district formula was in effect nationwide, it would lead to Democrats being shut out of the White House. In California, the GOP could capture as many votes as Ohio. Dems wouldn't get as many in one state. Texas has only 34.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Congressman Billybob]

This idea is NOT unconstitutional. Since two states now use this method, and 21 states have used it at one time or another, it is obviously constitutional.

John / Billybob

[Paleo Conservative]

RNC should be figuring out to get this initiative working in ALL states that do not already have it. Get the ball moving, make the Rats play defense, keep ‘em busy and make ‘em use up tons of money...

I wouldn't be surprised if the US Supreme Court ruled this initiative unconstitutional. The US Constitution very explicitly gives the power to determine how a state's electors are chosen to the state legislatures. Regardless of whether the state constitution considers initiatives that are passed to be acts of the legislature, I don't think it woudl satisfy the requirements of the US Constituion.

Article 2.

Section 1

......................

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: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

......................

[lonestar]

I forget how many Dems are elected to the TX state legislature but only 12 of them are white; majority are minority.

[goldstategop]

A legislature is free to delegate its lawmaking power to the people. That's what happened in California and some states. Let's say this passed. The Democrats go to court to overturn it, it looks like sour grapes. Because they don't agree with what voters passed in the election.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[goldstategop]

The Anglos have gone GOP. The Dems are a minority party in a lot of Southern states.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[free_life]

A good thing in all blue states.

[stm]

Not true, at least for FL. Look at the 2004 map. Personally I think this is the way to go. It would bury the dims once and for all.

[109ACS]

This idea is NOT unconstitutional. Since two states now use this method, and 21 states have used it at one time or another, it is obviously constitutional.

The "Right to Privacy" and "Separation of Church and State" are not in the Constitution. Extreme restrictions on gun ownership are also prohibited (...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.) Just because laws are passed contrary to the Constitution does not make them Constitutional. Just be careful what you wish for. The people who produce in this country will eventually be subject to the people with their hands out.

[Politicalmom]

Two words: Proposition 187.

*Sigh*

[Mr. K]

the analysis is simple- dems end up with about half they need just with NY and California.

And from that they win NY and CA with just a few counties. Western NY and NY city pretty much carry NY for the dems.

So, dems need to run effectively in just a handful of counties, while Republicans have to run and win everywhere else.

it sucks.

Remember the blue/red county map? it was almos ALL Republican except for tiny heavily populated areas of democraps, who essentially control the country and vote themselves all of the republican area wealth

[Mr. K]

Oh and another thing... if COUNTIES controlled STATE elections the same way, then REPUBLICANS WOULD WIN EVERYTHING EVERY ELECTION