Yeah, But Democrats Stole the Election For Kennedy 47 Years Ago (So Anything Done by the G.O.P. is OK)

Some Democrats want to give up the power of redistricting to be "fair" to the Republicans.

So if its unfair for us Californians to have our vote separated, perhaps it should be done as a national law for every state.

At least that would be closer to a direct polular vote.

If every state had districts up for grabs, candidates would certainly have to rethink their campaign stategy.

I'm sure you're right in that the Democrates will fight anything that changes the electoral count in California. Parties do what is in the best interest of itself.

I would also guess, that if California separated its electoral votes by candidate, that CA would be the first state to push changing the way its done on a national level.

And I thought Democrates wanted every vote to count?

If done nationally, that would bring the vote closer to a direct democracy. It also changes the dymanic from large v small state, to rural v. urban.

I'm sure you're right in that the Democrates will fight anything that changes the electoral count in California. Parties do what is in the best interest of itself.

I would also guess, that if California separated its electoral votes by candidate, that CA would be the first state to push changing the way its done on a national level.

It also changes the dymanic from large v small state, to rural district v. urban district.

And I thought Democrates wanted every vote to count?

That would be closer; another amendment not necessary.

Cavala is getting at somthing larger here, which is, to wit: what is the value of an American? Republican efforts for the last quarter century have been to reduce the value of large numbers of Americans to, essntially, zero. The economic result has been to restore the distribution of wealth to Gilded Age levels (there are claims that it is the result of globablization but the distribution of wealth in European countries, including England, has not been so dramatically skewed).

Not unnaturally, most Americans don't particularly like being on the bottom of this pyramid (there are news reports out today that half of Americans have trouble sleeping because of economic insecurity. Half!). The Republican response has been to, rather than attept to even things out, to try and disenfranchise these stressed out Americans. Republican efforts in California, on the allocation of electoral votes and redistricting, are further efforts in this direction.

Wake up Democrats! You face a determined and implacable foe in the current Republican party. Negotiate for your interests, rather than for some abstract goal of "fairness", which reduces down to a concept we might hear bandied about on Fox News.

publius: Any larger state (regardless of party in charge) wouldn't want to change the way it counts electoral votes. So don't simply blame 1 party.

I would imagine Texas, Ohio, Illinois, and Florida also would not wish their electoral votes decided on by district. Most are firmly Republican controlled.

I imagine no large state would do so. (It reduces any power, and thus influence, on the natioanl scene.)

As a conservative, I hate to see my vote wasted in CA every election (not that it stops me). That's also true for Democrates in GOP states.

If its done in CA, I would wager a sudden shift from CA politicians demanding the same change, citing 'fairness' across the country.

Ridding ourselves of the electoral college seems unlikley, however reforming it on a national scale would seem a better move.

And its closer toward a straight democracy, thereby making my vote count.

a "sudden shift toward fairness" in the Confederacy??

Why don't we hold their hat and wait on them?

AngelDecoys: There is one bill in the California legislature, SB 37 (Migden) the National Popular Vote bill, that would have California and other states award their votes to the winner of the national popular vote. That way whoever wins the most votes nationwide wins the presidency.

That would have every vote count equally.

It passed with Democratic votes and was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger in the last session in 2006 as AB 2848.

So, you are not correct in statements that Democrats do not support changes in the Electoral College. And if you check articles written by me on this issue in these pages, you will see that I have supported it.

Changing to a vote by Congressional District in California will actually increase the likelihood of a President elected while receiving less votes nationwide-- http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/09/dividing_califo.html

And if you don't believe that that is exactly what the Republicans have in pushing their scheme, look no further than to what Tony Andrade, who has been pushing this proposal had to say in a comment to an article earlier this week on that proposal: "Since the Electoral College meets on Dec. 1, 2008 the passed Initiative would be in effect. The Democrat candidate would lose 24 electoral votes and lose the National election."

He's admitted in his own words what this is all about. I rest my case.

It is high time my vote will count. I always felt disenfranchised since the big liberal city voters always stole the show and the media pandered to the articulate liberal speakers. People who do not share their philosophy had no where to go.
California is not just Los Angeles or just the Bay Area.
California is politically diverse and liberals do not speak for me and my take on issues.
We need to be represented in national politics.
This proposition will give us back our voices.
We want our fair share of air time.
We want our turn at being heard.
We pay taxes too.

Russo: I don't doubt that Republicans have an agenda with the initiative. As a conservative, I doubt I would vote for it myself. Nor do I doubt that Democrates have their agenda either.

Any state premoninantly controlled by 1 party would resist any such change.

While I would prefer each district electoral vote to be counted separately, I don't think its in California's best interest to be only 1 of a handful of states to do so (and the only large state).

I only see that idea working on a national level for every state, at the same time. Everyone must give a little to gain a little.

Otherwise, CA becomes simply a bunch of smaller states with regards to electoral votes.

Regarding AB 2848. I care even less for that idea. In essence, candidates could totally avoid California knowing that if they won all the other larger states, and all the other votes, that Californias electoral count is thrown their direction automatically.

If that were the case, why bother counting votes in CA at all?

Good intent, bad execution.

National popular vote would have put California in the Bush camp in 2004. That would have been something to see the President gets crushed in CA and yet walks away with the biggest piece of the pie.

Wasn't it the North Carolina Democrats who pushed the district electoral plan and only stopped when Howard Dean slapped them upside the head and said you're giving the Republicans out in California ideas.

Russo: Upon reading more about the law, and link you provided, I will have to reflect a bit before making further judgment. Its creative, I'll give it that.

Honestly, It sounds like it would just be easier to amend the Constitution over waiting for the pre-requisite states to enact such legislation.

Ridding ourselves of the electoral college entirely would be more straight forward.

You'll be waiting a good deal longer for the Constitution to be amended, I'll guarnatee you. A Two-thirds vote in Congress and 3/4 of the tates ratifying it.

Post a comment