Republicans Miss Deadline for June Ballot “Dirty Tricks” Change in Electoral College—But Are Now Planning on November Ballot Itself

While of course this abomination should not be on the ballot let us not forget that the Common Cause/Schwartenegger redistricting commission is also planned for that election. This gives the Democrats an opportunity to paint this (as it is) a Republican two-fer to change the rules of the game to their favor and to run successful campaigns against both misbegotten efforts.

Why don't these GOP slimeballs just give it up already? This issue has stressed me out so much.

If democrats and so-called progressives were truly interested in fairness and democracy, they'd speak out against the dirty tricks their party pulled in undermining Ralph Nader's candidacy in 2004. Both parties of the incumbent duopoly operate in a Machiavellian style that puts winning above true democracy. I hope Nader's lawsuit helps expose this fact.

Republicans and Democrats want to preserve their power at any cost, with restrictive ballot access laws for third parties and independents and no vision to inspire the 50 percent plus who don't see any reason to vote. Whatever happened to the idea of abolishing the Electoral College? Why don't Democrats support proportional representation for state and federal offices? How can a party that's part of the problem of corrupting democracy be expected to solve it?

Paul: There's a lot you have lumped together in your comment here.

First of this Democrat--with a big D--supports IRV voting also known as ranked choice voting. It is the Democratic legislature in this state that has passed bills to further this. Some have been vetoed by the Governor. Most pass without the surrpot of Republicans. If we had this at the level of our vote for President and the like, then folks could waste their first vote for Nader and then vote for someone who has a chance of winning.

You ask what happened to the concept of abolishing the Electoral College altogether. Well, last year the legislature passed AB 2948 to have California enter into an interstate compact with other states to award their votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. The bill was passed without Republican support and was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

A similar bill is now awaiting final passage and needs a floor vote to go to the Gov again.

Yeah dirty tricks are bad... like placing a prop. on the ballot disguised as tougher term limits but is really just a blatant power grab by the Speaker to stay in power for 6 more years.

Hello kettle its the pot again!

Sean opines about term limits and dishonest presentation. Prop 93 changes term limits and, to a degree, shortens them. Would Nunez have put it on the ballot without something for him and the other legislators? No. Does it shorten term limits. Yes, but primarily it changes them so that representation is more effective. This might give Nunez a few more years but then he'll be gone and we still will have the more effective representation. Six years is simply not enough in the Assembly to learn things and produce effective policy. If you want more effective representation, vote for Prop 93.

Hey Frank

First off, you need to pass a Constitutional Amendment (I'm sure you know what one is) and it has to be ratified by 38 states in order to change the Electoral College process. AB2948 would have been thrown out because it would be considered unconstitutional and the similar bill you are referring to will suffer the same fate if the Governor is stupid enough to sign it into law

publius,

Quoting you above, "Would Nunez have put it on the ballot without something for him and the other legislators? No."

I thought these folks worked for US, the taxpayers, not the other way around.

Your quote, "This might give Nunez a few more years but then he'll be gone and we still will have the more effective representation."

No he won't be gone, he is a "professional politician" who has designs on being the Mayor of Los Angeles and perhaps eventually the Governor. Fine, however he want to keep this job to stay visible for those future endeavors as it won't be his "turn" until Villaraigosa leaves the stage. Plus all his special interest contacts would remain intact were he to hang around longer waiting for his next job, not to mention he would continue to spend his campaign money on high quality perks for himself in the meantime.

Your quotes, "Effective representation" and "Six years is simply not enough in the Assembly to learn things and produce effective policy.": Does that include the experience it takes to create a budget with a $10 Billion dollar deficit in it? Just what kind of experience and political savvy does it take to create such a budget over the course of the entire legislative year? We need to keep this kind of experience around longer???

Nunez and legislators supporting Proposition 93 would have had more credibility with it IF they included NO LOOPHOLE that it would apply to everyone BUT THEM.

Why do only democrats want Proposition 93 to pass? Why did Nunez only ask democrats in the legislature to chip in $50K each on the campaign to pass Prop 93 and not ALL legislators?

In it's current form, absolutely NO on Proposition 93!

Darrell: You state as a matter of law that it takes a constitutional amendment to do what AB 2948 set out to accomplish. You are flat out wrong. Where is your authority? State legislatures under the Constitution have the power to decide how to allocate their Electoral College votes. If we choose to do so on the basis of who won the popular vote, that is allowed under the Constitution.

Notwithstanding all the comments, the article stands.

Post a comment