- HOME
- About
- Topics
- Angelides
- Arnold Schwarzenegger
- California Attorney General Race
- California Congressional Races
- California Democratic Party
- California Governor Race 2010
- California Legislative Races
- California Lt. Governor Race
- California Secretary of State Race
- California State Budget
- California State Controller
- Campaign Finance Reform
- Campaigns
- Cell Phones
- Children and Families
- Consumer Rights
- Corporate Accountability
- Criminal Justice
- Death With Dignity
- Disaster Preparation
- Discrimination and Civil Rights
- Education
- Elections and Voting
- Electoral College
- Energy
- Environment
- Farm Animal Cruelty Ballot Measure
- Flood Control
- Food Safety
- Gas Prices
- Governor's Election Race
- Gun control
- Health Care
- Health Insurance
- Hiram Johnson's Corner
- Housing
- Human Rights
- Humor
- Immigration
- Infrastructure
- Initiative Reform
- Insurance Commissioner Race
- Labor
- Language and Politics
- Legal System
- Media and Communication
- Minimum Wage
- Open Government
- Pharmaceutical Companies
- Politics
- Preschool
- Presidential Election 2008
- Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act Prop
- Prison Reform
- Privacy
- Privitization
- Prop 11-Redistricting/Reapportionment
- Prop 1A--High Speed Rail
- Prop 2--Treatment of Farm Animals
- Prop 3-Children's Hospital Bonds
- Prop 4 Waiting Period and Parental Notification
- Prop 5--Non-violent drug offenses
- Prop 7 and 10-Alternative Fuel and Energy Bond
- Prop 8 and-Marriage Equality
- Prop 85 Parental Notification
- Prop 86 Tobacco Tax
- Prop 87--Alternative Energy
- Prop 9 Parole
- Prop 90
- Prop 91--Transportation Funding
- Prop 92- Community Colleges
- Prop 93--Term Limits
- Props 94-97--Tribal Gaming
- Props 98 and 99
- Racial Disparities
- Responsible Lending
- Retirement Benefits
- Site of the Day
- Solar Initiative
- Structure of California Government
- Taxes
- Toxic Chemicals
- Transportation/Transit
- Water
- Westly
- Workers' Compensation
- Stories
- Cavala: A Constitutional Convention for California?
- Eight Years From Bush v. Gore to Palin: The Bridge to Nowhere
- California Proposition 11: Redistricting Commission – YES
- What Does a Republican Running in an Increasingly Democratic District Do? Why Aghazarian Wants to Make Legislative Races Non-Partisan
- Prop 1A and High Speed Rail's Role in Fighting Dependence on Oil and Sprawl in California
- Schwarzenegger Vetoes Bill Recommended By Autism Commission
- Governor Schwarzenegger Can Put a Dent in Auto Repair Fraud and Protect Consumers by Signing AB 2825
- California Assembly District 26: Republican Refuses to Debate Eisenhut in Close Race Democrats May Pick Up
- Bankruptcy Relief and the Bailout
- A Renewed Call for Mortgage Reform in California
- Preschool Legislation Aimed at Closing the Achievement Gap in California Becomes Law
- Debate: Opening Advantage Obama
- Directory
- Donate
- Contact Us
RSS Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- California Wildfires and the Urgency of Combating Climate Change
- California Education Cuts in the Year After the “Year of Education”
- A Breeze of Fresh Air from Washington D.C. To California? Waxman and Dingell Battle Today--Reactions to Obama's Climate Remarks—Schwarzenegger Calls Them “Fantastic”
- Stronger Renewable Energy Goals For California: Schwarzenegger’s Executive Order and Where We Go From Here
- Dear Speaker Pelosi, Can California Have $25 Billion?
- California Democratic Party Meeting Last Weekend a Window to the Future and Areas That Need Improvement
- Save the Renter’s Tax Credit for Seniors Eliminated by Schwarzenegger’s Blue Pencil
About Us
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
Attorney Seeks Probe of California Electoral Vote Plan
By Terry Williams
Attorney Barry Fadem has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking information about contacts between the White House, the RNC, and those behind the California Dirty Tricks Initiative.
According to the Contra Costa Times:
"A Lafayette attorney who specializes in election law is seeking a Congressional investigation into whether the White House was involved in pushing a California ballot initiative to change the way the state allocates its electoral votes.
"Barry Fadem, who is working for the group opposed to the initiative, also made a Freedom of Information Act request with the White House on Friday to reveal all contacts between Bush Administration officials, the Republican National Committee and other political operatives discussing potential changes to the state's electoral college laws."
"We want to know if the White House improperly discussed this on taxpayer time," said Fadem, a Democrat. "But we also want to make people aware that this is not some new idea, not some good public policy that proponents keep claiming. This is truly only about one thing: stealing the presidency."
According to Chris Lehane, political consultant and spokesperson for Californians for Fair Election Reform, "The public has a strong interest in knowing if this was cooked up by the Bush White House."
Agreed. Especially since they're playing dumb about it. It's kind of amazing/amusing to watch them act like no one knows anything about this, as if it's all the work of one loose cannon RNC attorney. The RNC says they're not involved. The governor claims he doesn't know enough to comment on it. Riiiiight.
Note: when you act like you're hiding something, people will naturally want to know what you're hiding.
Terry Williams is a San Diego writer and activist who writes at Terryfaceplace, "Confessions of a Reluctant Activist."
Comments
Initiatives 07-0032, 07-0048, 07-0048, 07-0049, and 07-0052 all operate under the impermissible assumption that any California constitutional amendment or a statute [other than an action of the Legislature] can have any legal effect in this area. The power of choosing a state's electors comes from and is SOLELY governed by the U.S. Constitution, Art. II, § 1 [See the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore]. Even if the California Legislature enacted such a law, it can at any time prior to the actual selection of the electors set aside the effect of any legislature-passed statute and rely solely on its own federally given power, obviating sending it to the governor with his veto power as required under the California Constitution.
In the disputed 2000 presidential election, the Republican-dominated Florida legislature was giving serious consideration to doing just that, setting aside all election controversies and choosing the Republican slate of electors by a vote of the legislature itself.
Any popular initiative on such a subject would be a juridical nullity. That is why the entire electoral college system can only be amended by a federal constitutional amendment.
Let's take an extreme example. Suppose all 50 states enter into an interstate compact approved by Congress to modify the effect of the winner-take-all system. All it would take is one state legislature to bolt and rely on its federal constitutional power to cast its state electoral votes as it sees fit. In all likelihood, it would not come to that since a federal constitutional amendment would have passed first.
Dale Alan Diefenbach
Senior Reference Librarian, retired
Harvard Law School
Posted by: Dale Alan Diefenbach at September 11, 2007 10:21 AM
Post a comment
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.
