[SmithL]

I like this proposal, but I do not think it will withstand Constitutional scrutiny. The Legislature could legally implement this proposal, but that will never happen in this bluest of states.

[The_Reader_David]

I think it will: in states where intitiative and referendum are part of the state constitution, the electorate is the legislature intermittently when there are ballot issues.

[taxcontrol]

Since initiatives have the weight of law in California, why would it not pass Constitutional muster?

[Bluegrass Conservative]

If this happens, Republicans should have a virtual lock on the presidency. That would be an extra 15-20 electoral votes!

[NRG1973]

“” like this proposal, but I do not think it will withstand Constitutional scrutiny.””

Why not? Its already being done in two states (New Mexico & New Hampshire).

[SnakeDoctor]

I don’t really think this is a particularly good precedent to set. It sounds great in California ... but we might not be so pleased if it were to happen in Texas (which, if it happens in CA, TX will be close behind).

This draws the nation closer to a popular election, and farther away from the state-based electoral election the founders had invisioned.

This isn’t a good idea.

H

[phillyfanatic]

This is a clever initiative and we in the GOP , a huge minority now in Ca., will vote for it. But, no one else will. I cannot see how the majority Dems will allow this ploy to get by. If Arnold came out for it, perhaps. But, even then , I doubt it.

[AuH2ORepublican]

“I like this proposal, but I do not think it will withstand Constitutional scrutiny. The Legislature could legally implement this proposal, but that will never happen in this bluest of states.”

---

I agree with you. The Constitution provides that the state legislatures decide how electoral votes are handed out. Doing this by referendum would be just as unconstitutional as when that Brazilian billionaire placed a proportional-EVs method on the Colorado ballot in 2004, or when the Florida Supreme Court changed the legislatively approved rules for counting votes in presidential elections.

As for the initiative proponent’s statement that the CD method could go into effect for the election being held on the same day that the initiative is approved, I don’t think it holds water. The rules for handing out EVs are the ones in place on the day of the election, and can’t be changed retroactively. Even if the referendum is deemed to be an appropriate way to change the rules, it wouldn’t be able to go into effect until the 2012 election.

[Clemenza]

California Republicans are not conservative, they are "populist."

The Mobocratic "recall and referendum" BS is one of the key reasons that CA is a laughingstock. Rule by the Sheeple indeed.

[Amerigomag]

The closer an election comes to representing the individual opinion of an elector, the closer our republic comes to mob rule.

Our system: We choose electors. They choose the winner. Any deviation and we are no longer a democratic republic.

Democracy, especially direct democracy, is the most abusive and shortest lived of all forms of governance.