In Defense of the Pennsylvania Electoral College Plan ( John Ziegler )

American Thinker ^ | 9/19/2011 | John Ziegler

[Joy Angela]

...For those who don't yet know about it (if the plan gets close to fruition, it will be one of the biggest political stories of the year), Pennsylvania is considering allocating their Electoral College votes in 2012 the way that Maine and Nebraska already do so by giving two to the winner of the state and one each to the victor of every congressional district.

The reason why this proposal is getting so much attention is because President Obama is expected to win Pennsylvania, just as the Democratic candidate has in every presidential election since 1988, which would give him 20 votes in the Electoral College.

[Joy Angela]

Excerpted, please see link for entire expert analysis by Play-by-Play Genius, John Ziegler!

I actually learned something by reading this: Elections are won and lost by the numbers, and it looks like Obama has them.

What are we Conservatives and Patriots going to do to stop another Democrat win?

Our candidate better be REAL and not PUFF.

[Sacajaweau]

The history of the electoral college is pretty awesome. It was to prevent people from winning by "blocks".

So Politics got smarter...They created the biggest blocks in the biggest states. The Dems additionally created huge blocks...like AARP and NOW....and they nurtured the union vote.

Finally, in the Repub Camp, the Tea Parties, and a lot of them, came to be...essentially doing the same thing.

The elections are beginnng to show the results of these groups. Congrats to the Tea Parties.

[traditional1]

When half the population is dependent upon Government force, at all levels, to derive their income, you KNOW the Progressive/Democrat/Socialist/Wealth-Redistributor is gonna win the elections.

Coupled with the Fraud of the Left, it is a real uphill struggle to take back this once-great Country.

[Michael Barnes]

Which is why the left LOVES the illegals. The Left’s “blocks” continue to abort themselves while the right’s continues to embrace life. The left has to make up for it somewhere and what better way with baby making machines with a heavy, heavy social tilt?

[Michael Barnes]

PA is changing, slowly, but surely. I think a lot of the ex PAtriates are coming back to the state now; they were more likely than not Republicans who went south during the .com boom. Our large cities and the capitol still suck bad, but getting outside of the cities, the state is leaning more and more right and that population is growing..

[cumbo78]

The reason NONE of the alternate plans are better than the Electoral College is because it would become to simple for a fringe candidate to accrue electoral votes that would deny a candidate the necessary 270 to win. Any proportional type system would send the election to the House of Reps on a fairly regular basis, thus canceling everyone’s vote. Keep it the way it is.

[GAB-1955]

I think it’s a good idea and if Pennsylvania wants to implement it, go ahead!

[who_would_fardels_bear]

Interesting. That's a good point, and one I have not heard yet. It seems an obvious downside, but I never thought about it.

I guess a lot of us are still stuck with the two-party system in our heads.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

It's going to be interesting hearing the arguments from "conservatives" who will base their arguments not on what is right or wrong, but what is most likely to get Obama defeated.

Those "conservatives" who think PA might go for the Republican might oppose this, not on Constitutional grounds, but in hopes of getting all of PA's votes.

Likewise "conservatives" who think PA is still going Democrat regardless might decide that "state's rights" trump the electoral system so that we can get at least some of PA's votes.

Such "pragmatic" thinking in the short run could come back to haunt us in the long run.

[traditional1]

The situation in PA is similar to Ohio. The Liberal bastions of parasitic population (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Toledo, etc.) are hard to overcome with "flyover country" votes. Between the fraud, multi-voting, etc. in the inner-cities, it is slowly becoming possible now to outvote them with numbers across suburbia and rural areas.

Hopefully, in 2012, Ohio will turn Red again, as the Unions have driven most blue collar work out of the state and out of the country.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I submit the following: the Pennsylvania plan is fully as Constitutional as the winner take all concept on the state basis. It is totally in alignment with the concept of the House of Representatives ala proportionment.

It would also work to the Republicans favor forever, given that Democrats dominate high rise big city districts 90-10 and the GOP dominates many districts 55-45 or 60-40 (very rough figures, but you get the idea).

The Dems are scared to death of this. I doubt a single Democrat would have been elected in recent memory under this system. This is the red county blue county map come to life.

[Free_SJersey]

This is how I always thought it should be. I honestly feel like my vote doesn’t count at all in Presidential races. The dead people in Newark and Jersey City are the ones who decide on NJ Electoral votes.

[The_Reader_David]

There is nothing in this about “the electoral system” being trumped by anything, Section 1 Clause 2 of the US Constitution reads: “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.”

There is nothing in the Constitution about allocating electors committed to a Presidential candidate a on a winner-take-all basis, that is simply the system the legislatures of most of the several states have chosen to use (Maine and Nebraska being the current exceptions). In theory a legislature could decide to chose electors itself, rather than on the basis of a popular vote, though I’m sure such a decision would be sufficiently unpopular as to be politically infeasible.

[Verginius Rufus]

There's nothing in the Constitution that says that the electors have to be chosen by a vote of the people--as late as 1860 South Carolina did not do it that way. A state with a heavily Democratic legislature could pass a law that the electors would be chosen by the members of the state legislature.

It was with reference to rural Pennsylvania voters that Obama made his comments in 2008 about voters who clung to their guns and religion. James Carville once described Pennsylvania as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, with Alabama in between.

[WOSG]

The PA plan is a brilliant plan

It will contain vote fraud to a district by district basis, rendering urban vote fraud a pointless exercise. That will make elections more honest. This is more important than the tactical advantage of breaking up a blue state voting strength (we may win PA outright in 2012, but as Ziegler points out, the only way we win PA is if we actually dont need it and win OH, VA and other states.)

Zeigler also points out how breaking up the PA EVs will put Obama in a serious box in getting to 272 electoral votes.

Go for it!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Such "pragmatic" thinking in the short run could come back to haunt us in the long run.

Let's face it - if you want to be conservative the legislature would just decide who the electors would be - never mind this election stuff.

The whole FL 2000 mess could have been avoided if the legislature had just decided who it wanted the electors to be.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

First of all, with only a few highly competitive districts in Pennsylvania, even a tidal wave of angry Democrats rushing to the polls would only give Obama another couple of votes at most. Secondly, if Silver really thinks that the average voter even knows what the Electoral College is to begin with, or believes that a clearly legal adjustment to it would create massive outrage, then he is dangerously out of touch for a guy who claims to be an expert on how people vote.

It would be naive in the extreme to discuss allocation of Electors based on congressional districts without any reference to the issue of the gerrymandering of those districts. As I said previously, the legislature has the right to define how the electors are selected - and it is therefore not unnatural that the method they choose have a high-sounding rationale, and a convenient reason.

[Impy]

Pennsylvania is considering the Nebraska/Maine method of allocating electoral votes by Congressional district.

[GOPsterinMA]

I guess in theory it could help the GOP; PIT and PHI won’t always tip the entire states EV’s to the Rats.

OTOH, I’m not a big fan of tinkering.