Posted on 07/31/2007 4:49:06 PM PDT by kellynla
A prominent Republican lawyer wants to put a proposal on the California ballot next year that could shake up the 2008 presidential contest to his party's advantage.
California awards its 55 electoral votes to the statewide winner — the largest single prize in the nation. But under the proposal, the statewide winner would get only two electoral votes. The rest would be distributed to the winning candidate in each of the state's congressional districts. In effect, that would create 53 races, each with one electoral vote up for grabs.
The state voted Democratic in the past four presidential elections. But the change — if it qualifies for one of two primary ballots early next year and is approved by voters — would mean a Republican would be positioned the following November to win about 20 electoral votes in Republican-leaning districts. That is a number equal to winning Ohio.
The Presidential Election Reform Act is being pushed by Thomas Hiltachk, a lawyer in a Sacramento firm that represents the California Republican Party and worked with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. He did not return phone messages left yesterday at his office. A Schwarzenegger spokeswoman said the governor is not involved with the proposed initiative.
Democratic consultant Chris Lehane called the plan "an effort to rig the system in order to fix the election."
"If this change is made, it will virtually guarantee that a Republican wins the White House in 2008," Mr. Lehane said in an e-mail.
Nineteen of the state's 53 congressional districts are represented by Republicans. President Bush carried 22 districts in 2004, while losing the statewide vote by double digits. Maine and Nebraska now allocate electoral votes by congressional district.
A draft of the proposed initiative says nixing the winner-take-all system would give presidential candidates "an incentive to campaign in California. ... Many of the geographic areas of the state would be as important to a candidate's chance for victory as many of the smaller states."
"We'll take a serious look at it, once it qualifies for the ballot," said state Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring.
If it does qualify, Democrats probably would spend millions of dollars against it, which could drain money from other races.
ping
Democratic consultant Chris Lehane called the plan “an effort to rig the system in order to fix the election.”
That’s funny coming from a party that’s actively trying to get states to ignore the voters in the state and cede all electoral college votes to the candidate who gets the most votes in the nationwide popular election. Personally I think both ideas are bad.
The dems are for this in other states. but I hate it either way.
This is how the EC was intended to work. It was meant to break up the influence of major population centers.
“an effort to rig the system in order to fix the election.”
Oh, you mean like drawing the Congressional districts so that Democrats keep getting re-elected. Maybe the people that live somewhere other than L.A. and S.F. would like to see their votes count for a change.
My head just exploded.
The Democrats tried this in Colorado a couple years ago and failed. The scheme is to push it only in the states where one’s own party is not likely to win the Presidential election, thereby watering down the other side’s EV total.
It is the way it actually worked, at least in some states, up until the Civil War.
In the Los Angeles area, but my district would undoubtedly vote Republican come the general election, so, count me in for actually having a voice again.
Wow, what a great idea to finally bring some balance to the districts - sure, it tosses away the idea of a Republican ever taking the full 55 again, but it'd make one heck of a difference.
The only downfall is this is going to prop up all of the liberal media in this state as campaigns start to flood the state with campaign advertising.
I’d be for the adoption of the district system nation wide. Perhaps even in an Amendment.
what are the chances of it passing?
What's the potential fallout if this process is carried out to its fullest extent?
I think this is a bad idea, no matter the "good intentions" that may, or may not be, involved.
chaos.
Although I would love to see this happen in CA, it would create havoc if adopted nation wide and would ensure a handful of cities like LA, NY, Philly, and Chicago with a few others thrown in would elect the president...
Even the bluest states would contribute electors to the Republican candidate. The only places that Rats would benefit is in the largest cities in the red states.
Swing states might not be 'swing', however. We can expect them to oppose this. I personally like the idea. It would be much more representative of the way the country feels about a Presidential candidate. It actually gives third party candidates a chance at being a large footnote in history, rather than a small one.
It would be fun to see if someone could take voting results from the past several elections, and see what the electoral vote totals would be.
The Dems are pushing this in North Carolina and it looks as if they may well succeed. If this is the way they want things to go then we need to show them how it will really hurt!
I agree with Free Bird. When you start messing with things like the EC that was so carefully thought out, you do not know the unintended consequences. Best to leave it alone. Even if this makes sense, you know the libs will find some way of making it mean THEY win. Somehow. All their thinking is spent on malevolent Machiavellian plots.
Nebraska and Maine both alot their electoral votes according to the system the ballot initiative proposes for California.
In fact the several states can chose to allocate their electoral votes any way they want: if the legislature of a state wanted to, it could decide to select the electors itself (though the voters would bounce out the party that voted the measure in in the next state legislative elections).
Of course in states like California with initiative and referendum, each election day, the electorate becomes the legislature, and likewise can decide to adopt any measure for selecting presidential electors they want, be it the Nebraska/Maine system, or a requirement that electors not formally committed to any candidate campaign in districts and be personally elected as electors, or any other procedure they like, including the ‘let’s partially disenfanchise ourselves’ system of picking a slate committed to the winner of the national popular vote that the ‘RATs are pushing.
I rather like the proposal. Obviously if it is adopted it tilts toward the GOP, since the demonRATs can’t count on the LA basin and the Bay area to deliver them CA’s 55 electoral votes as a block.
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.