this would destroy our election system and allow the north east US to basically take over the governement legally.... lets stop this or we all will be out of luck ...
if Bush wins Colorado, look for this amendment to fail.
That means that either it doesn't go into effect this election, or Colorado fails the "Safe Harbor" conditions, and the Congress is free to reject Colorados slate.
Amendment 36 is unconstitutional. Article II clearly states that it is up to the state legislature to decide how EV's are selected, not referenda.
It is unconstitutional, because it is a referendum. The constitution very specifically says that the state legislatures, and only the state legislatures have the authority to determine the method by which electors are chosen! The Colorado legislature very specifically rejected such a system.
As long as large states like California, New York and Texas do not change from a winner take all system, it is not in the interest of small states like Colorado to do so.
I also don't want to forgot to mention that it also violates the federal election code. The method by which the electors is selected must be in place before (as I recall at least six days prior to) the date the electors are chosen which is election day. Even if the a referendum were a valid mechanism of determining the method of allocating electors, this referendum is too late to affect the 2004 election. This referendum should be fought in court and removed from the ballot.
Article II.Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows: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.
A proportional approach prevents the balance of power from tipping hard on the slimmest of margins. The debacle in Florida would never have happened with a proportional approach.
Discover Magazine | Sept. 30, 2004 | Math Against Tyranny
It's a backdoor attempt to eliminate the Electoral College. The people of Colorado will reject this if they are sane, and the Supreme Court will reject it if they're not.
ping
Will there not be a court suit about the Constitutionality of this?
Having voted in Colorado a few times, I can tell you that it is pretty tough to predict how these propositions will go. One election, they voted down a tax increase for schools, but also voted down a provision that would give tax credits for home schooling. Last election they voted against getting rid of bilingual education. And of course everyone remembers the Tabor amendment and the anti pro gay legislation dealie. Real conservative at times, but sometimes not. I fear that this one might pass out of pure ignorance about how the electoral system works. Colorado would basically cede what little power it has in Presidential elections, which was only gained in the last census/redistricting. I really hope they don't become the first fools in the nation, although I would love to see the electoral college vote here in Cali split up.
Besides the dilution of their electoral clout, you'd think many Coloradans would reject this amendment simply because it was proposed and financed by an outsider.
Some good reading about switching to popular vote:
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/election2k/concon2k1/elecmap.htm
Please read this page!
"If Amendment36 is such a great idea, why doesn't California try it first?"
I agree with the other posters who say it's unconstitutional. Even if it passes, it will be struck down.
A couple of days ago, it was reported that Amendment 36 was failing by about 14 points. At the rate it's been dropping, I think it'll lose by at least 20 points come election day.