Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

About Us

Frank D. Russo

The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.

About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.

Sponsors

Books

California Assembly Passes Electoral College Reform

National Popular Vote Bill Passes 49-31 and Now Goes to State Senate

Fadem,-Umberg,-and-Koza.gif

By Frank D. Russo

California is one step closer to joining a national movement that would change the way that the Electoral College works without amending the U.S. Constitution.

AB 2948 by Assemblymember Tom Umberg, Chair of the Assembly Elections Committee is a simple bill that would have California join in an interstate compact with other states to award our electoral votes to the Presidential candidate who won the national popular vote.

The picture above shows Umberg at a press conference last week, flanked by California attorney Barry Fadem and Dr. John Koza, who together with former Republican Congressman Tom Campbell, are the key proponents of this measure. In their hands is the book written by Fadem, Koza, and others that you can read for free and download it if you are interested in all the arguments and details carefully worked out as part of a 50 state campaign that is just beginning to ramp up.

They have thought of every conceivable argument against this approach, leaving opponents with the sole intellectually defensible argument of being in opposition to “direct democracy,” an evil some Republican Assemblymembers believe is an affront to the founding fathers. As we all know, the original Constitution did not have the direct election by the people of their US Senators until it was amended. Women, slaves, and those who did not own property or the means to pay a poll tax were also excluded.

Despite some alarmist statements made by some Republican Assemblymembers, this measure is provided for in the US Constitution, which specifically allows for interstate compacts and also gives the states plenary power to award their electoral votes as they wish. Two states, Nebraska and Maine, allot their votes by Congressional Districts.

The press release issued by Assemblymember Umberg’s office states that this bill passed on a “bipartisan” vote. Unfortunately, however, only one Republican, Rick Keene, joined the entire Democratic membership of the Assembly to vote for this bill. They apparently fear “direct democracy” and want California to remain irrelevant in Presidential campaigns along with most of the nation, except for providing the cash for them. Maybe they are happy that California only receives back from the federal government 79 cents of every dollar paid in taxes, and are content that the few states in play in Presidential politics have more clout in getting the attention of those running for President.

Umberg put it this way:

“California needs to be more than a campaign stop for cash and photo ops by those seeking to lead our country. California, like the other ‘safe’ states, is virtually ignored during presidential campaigns. As a result, issues that are of concern to our 15 million voters aren’t addressed adequately by the candidates.

The current system of running for president essentially disenfranchises voters in the more than 30 “safe” states. Campaigns focus on the 6 or so select “battleground” states skewing the entire focus of the campaign to what is important in those particular states. States have become more important than individual voters.

A vote in Anaheim, California should be as important as a vote in Akron, Ohio. AB 2948 will make the presidential campaign about voters and not about states. That is not only a long overdue change, but reflects the true essence of democracy.”

You don’t have to read a book to understand the workings of AB 2948. The Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN) said it all today in reporting California’s historic action:

In states across the country, a simple idea is building momentum. Rather than amending the Constitution to guarantee that the winner of the national popular vote wins the Presidency, why not simply amend state law?

The gist is this: states enter into an agreement. If states with enough electors to elect a President on their own pass similar measures, all the measures go into effect and the bound states award all of their electors to the winner of the popular vote nationally.

You can read the Assembly Floor Analysis which is a short and sweet 3 pages long.

Or you can watch the coverage of KGO News and see Umberg interviewed

To see what is happening in other states, go the National Popular Vote site. There, you will see that in other states this measure has bipartisan support. In some states, such as New York, it has been introduced by Republican legislators.

Despite some alarmist statements made by some Republican Assemblymembers, this measure is provided for in the US Constitution, which specifically allows for interstate compacts and also gives the states plenary power to award their electoral votes as they wish. Two states, Nebraska and Maine, allot their votes by Congressional Districts. There is no reason we cannot allot ours to the winner of the national vote.

Now it’s up to the Senate and the Governor. Let’s make history and make this happen.

Posted on May 31, 2006

Comments

I agree. I cannot believe that the founding fathers ever anticipated or intended that presidential electors would vote differently than the popular will. If we can't change the Constitution, and it would be a tough fight considering the power of small states in the current system, at least individual states can act to put behind us this draconian method of electing our country's chief executive.

Posted by: Randy Bayne at May 31, 2006 11:01 AM

"On the surface this may seem like a grand idea but what it does is prop up the current two party system and continues to alienate viable third party candidates by allocating all of the electoral votes to one political party candidate. This accomplishes the same affect as the current 'winner-take-all' program. Millions of Californians who may have voted for a different candidate than even the popular vote winner of other states would still be mandated to award that popular vote winner (of other states)all of California's 55 votes. This does not represent the congressional districts within the State. It trumps their popular vote results for those of other states within the union."
http://theworkingpatriot.blogspot.com/2006/06/ab-2948-not-answer-to-disenfranchised.html#links

Mike DiBartolo
Sacramento, CA

Posted by: Michael DiBartolo at June 4, 2006 01:08 PM

This is THE DUMBEST thing any Democrat has ever fallen for!! With our vote being clearly manipulated by Republicans in states like Florida and Ohio - now we want to give away California's right to choose a candidate and instead be tied to endorsing the candidate OTHER states choose???

UNFRICKINGBELIEVABLE.

I want the electoral college dissolved. But I REFUSE TO TURN OVER MY VOTE TO PEOPLE IN OTHER STATES.

Seriously - this makes me wonder about the intelligence level of my representatives in Sacramento. I'm going to find out if my State Assemblymember or State Senator voted for this and punish them appropriately.

PLEASE ASK THE GOVERNOR TO VETO THIS OUTRAGEOUS GRAB BY REPUBLICANS FOR CALIFORNIA'S VOTES.

In another place, this was referenced as the "Blue State Suicide Pact." I can't think of a more appropriate label.

STOP THE SUICIDE. Call the Governor NOW. We need a VETO.

Posted by: Real History Lisa at September 10, 2006 06:47 PM

If you really desired the electoral vote to be a fair representation of the people of California then the electoral votes would be divided between the top two candidates according to the percentage of popular votes each received.

This is another democrat scam to attempt to steal an election based on the number of people in the red states vs the blue states. Of course, there are more people in red states than blue states.

If this bill passes the Senate and then onto the governor's desk, and if he does not veto it then you can bet your bottom dollar that the citizens of CA will put forth a constitutional amendment to require the distribution of votes being distributed in accordance with how many votes each candidate receives.

Posted by: Ann Morgon at September 22, 2006 04:39 PM

Ann, with all due respect, I don't think you understand the bill. It only goes into effect if enough other states also agree to cast their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote. The objective is not to fairly divide California's electoral votes but to fairly elect a President based on who wins the popular vote nationwide.

Why would we divide our electoral votes proportionately when all but two states award theirs in a winner take all scenario? That's not fair to us in California.

Also, the bill is on the Governor's desk.

Posted by: Frank D. Russo at September 22, 2006 04:45 PM

It is somewhat disingenuous to say that "the U.S. Constituiton specifically allows for interstate compacts." True, they are mentioned, but the reference (Art. I, sec. 10, third paragraph)is a clear PROHIBITION against a state entering into such a compact "without the Consent of Congress." Hence until Congress approves such a compact, it is worthless and would be subject to challenge in any Federal Court.

Posted by: Douglas C. Dodge, Esq. at September 24, 2006 08:20 AM

Democrats are truely over the edge. It is time for a Progressive Pragmatist Party. If I understand this bill, if enough BLUE states sign on (270 votes) it goes into effect. Then if the blue states vote 51-49% (in each state) for the Democrat and the Red states vote 60-40% for the Republican, ALL of the BLUE states votes would go to the Republican Candidate. Democrats in Sacramento, just say good-bye to your country.

Posted by: Richard Jacques at June 19, 2007 07:31 PM

I strongly second Real History Lisa's opinion.

This measure, that would enshrine THROWING OUT the votes of the people of the state of California in favor of whomever wins the national popular vote is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, and I personally would go to the barricades to put a halt to this insanity.

Schwartzenegger was right to veto this silly proposal last year, and I would bet any money he will veto it again this year.

Absolute CRAZINESS!!

Posted by: David Foote at September 19, 2007 11:31 PM

it won't happen again! 'Fool Me Once, Shame on You. Fool me twice, Shame on ME!' - even though duhbya couldn't remember that, we do.

REJECT THE REPUBLICAN POWER GRAB IN CALIFORNIA! - Watch the Video at http://youtube.com/watch?v=BHICw5M-viQ
http://www.fairelectionreform.com/

CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN':
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the_plank?pid=146961

butt biters for election stealing
http://3rdave.blogspot.com/2007/09/butt-biters-for-election-stealing.html

Reporting on $175K donation, LA Times did not mention that GOP is behind CA electoral-vote initiative
http://mediamatters.org/items/200709260008

Mystery man's key role in move to change Electoral College http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/27/MNNCSDUH6.DTL

Shadow Money Funding Republican CA Efforts Exposed!!!
Shadow Money
Republicans are making a move in California that would greatly benefit their efforts to retain the White House. ABC7 News wanted an answerer to our question: Who's behind this effort? A shadowy GOP group not even located in California!
Watch the Video here!
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=5677389

Posted by: FreedomOfInformationAct at September 27, 2007 07:56 PM



its a ploy by the rupublicans

Posted by: guy at February 8, 2008 09:41 PM

I"m so happy tht Barak Obama won. My family and I and a lot of other families have been waiting for this a very long time.

Posted by: erika holyfield at November 11, 2008 03:39 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Get email updates!

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.



© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.

RSS

Stat tracker