Posted on 11/07/2007 8:12:04 AM PST by SmithL
Once again signatures are being gathered to qualify a Republican-backed initiative that would rig the way California's electoral votes are counted and, as a result, possibly decide who is elected president of the United States in 2008.
No candidate has claimed responsibility for the initiative, but there are some obvious fingerprints on the initiative drive. Paul Singer, a Wall Street hedge fund manager with close ties to GOP presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, is helping to bankroll the effort. Also, Anne Dunsmore, until recently a Giuliani fundraiser, has signed up to help with the campaign.
If Giuliani is involved, that's a reason to question his judgment if not his fitness for office. The last thing this country needs is another Election Day crisis. And this initiative, if approved by California voters, could trigger just such a crisis.
Here's why: Under California's current winner-take-all rules, the presidential candidate in the general election who wins a majority of the statewide vote collects all of the state's 55 electoral votes. That's the biggest electoral prize in the nation.
Under the rule change proposed in the initiative, California's electoral votes – unlike those of red states such as Texas and Florida – would be divvied up by congressional districts, with electoral votes awarded based on which candidate received the most votes in each of the state's congressional districts.
Given California's recent presidential election history, a Democrat is expected to win a majority of votes statewide and, thus, under current rules all 55 of the state's electoral votes. But if the initiative passes and is ruled constitutional, some 20 or so Republican-leaning congressional districts in California and their electoral...
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
be careful what you ask for. You do realize that doing this takes us down a road to the eventual elimination of the Electoral College in the name of fairness and to the popular vote being the standard. No thanks.
I think this has the correct level of granularity for the Electoral College: A pure national popular vote would result in lawsuits and recounts throughout the nation in a close election. Selecting Electors on a Congressional district basis will mean clear decisions in most districts, and only a few cases where recounts or questions over vote fraud will leave the outcomes in doubt for a while.
Of course to be fair this should be done throughout the country and in conjunction with new requirements to eliminate gerrymandering of districts. But it's certainly Constitutional to do it on a state-by-state basis.
However, the U.S. Constitution reserves the power to determine the method of selecting Electors exclusively to the Legislature. It's highly questionable under the California Constitution whether a popular initiative measure can be equated with the "Legislature". My guess is that the courts (both state and federal) would (legitimately) strike down this measure very quickly if it was passed by initiative rather than the state Legislature.
The real significance of this initiative is that it will force Democrats to spend $50 or $100 million to defeat it, simply because they dare not take the chance (however small) of losing in court and thereby losing a sure 20 electoral votes and the 2008 election. So this is a "soak up the other side's money" gambit, rather than a real attempt at Electoral College reform.
How ‘bout it drags us even further towards a stupid, self-destructive MOB-OCRACY!!! (or even an insane Kacistocrisy!!!)
Oneida Co., NY (county seat: Utica) went for Bush both in 2000 and 2004.
So my point was totally missed?
If I were to beg and plead that you please, please reconsider my post by excluding Utica, would you then think my point was valid oh great one?
This forum is for teenagers sometimes. I believe my patience is that of a 15 year old right now.
Where’s the barf alert!
LOL!
The commies want it both ways. On the east coast they want to abolish the electoral college. But when it suits them they want proportional voting. No need to spell hypocrisy. However, if conservatives believe in the constitution they ought to leave the intention of the founders in the electoral college and leave things well enough alone. It appears however that some “republicans” are for the electoral college only when it suits them, following the lead of the democrats. It’s really high time we got rid of both parties.
It will never get off the ground though I would sign the ballot petition to get it to be an initiative in a heart beat. As to Rudy supporting it, Ca. is now 2-1 Dem registration. Perhaps his endorsement would rally Orange, San Diego, parts of Riverside, and some middle Ca. counties to finally get represented. The Dem Leg. is so stuffed with incumbants and will never get defeated.
I agree but think how cool it would be if it passed electorally and then judicially and the manipulative legislature which set up the permanent minority Repub assembly and senate suddenly saw electoral votes going the way of the incumbents. Would they scream to high heaven to redistrict? After all, they gerrymandered Republican districts also, just ensuring they didn’t outnumber the gerrymandered Dem districts.
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.