Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Feinstein wants end to Electoral College Senator says she'll seek constitutional amendment
San Francisco Chronicle (Online) ^ | 12/23/2004 | Edward Epstein

Posted on 12/23/2004 8:40:52 AM PST by 1066AD

Feinstein wants end to Electoral College Senator says she'll seek constitutional amendment

- Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau Thursday, December 23, 2004

Washington -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Wednesday that when Congress returns in January, she will propose a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College and replace it with a one-person, one-vote system for electing the nation's president and vice president.

.....

"The Electoral College is an anachronism, and the time has come to bring our democracy into the 21st century," Feinstein said in a statement.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: democrathack; democratparty; democratpartyhack; electoralcollege; evil; hack; hatesamerica; jamitdifi; whenhellfreezesover; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-167 next last

1 posted on 12/23/2004 8:40:52 AM PST by 1066AD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Dream on, verminous Weasel Woman.


2 posted on 12/23/2004 8:42:49 AM PST by FormerACLUmember (Free Republic is 21st Century Samizdat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Dubya still wins!!!!


3 posted on 12/23/2004 8:43:30 AM PST by 1FreeAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
The time has come to bring our democracy into the 21st century," Feinstein said - You first
4 posted on 12/23/2004 8:43:31 AM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
She wants to replace it by what? The national majority? Bush wins there also, 61million! or does she want to replace by whoever captures California or NY or whatever State the RATS win?????
5 posted on 12/23/2004 8:43:47 AM PST by forYourChildrenVote4Bush (Thank you America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

I wonder if she'd be doing this if she represented Idaho?


6 posted on 12/23/2004 8:44:19 AM PST by geedee (History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Can you post a list of the Democrat senators from the small states..the ones with only a few EVs..this will be a very popular position for them to take.


7 posted on 12/23/2004 8:44:41 AM PST by ken5050 (Ann Coulter needs to have children ASAP to propagate her gene pool. Any volunteers?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
Won't happen Fineswine.

Too many red states.

8 posted on 12/23/2004 8:44:45 AM PST by b4its2late (How much can I get away with and still go to heaven?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

It could never get ratified. State's like mine would never be campaign stops without the electoral college, and for that very reason, the states with smaller populations would never stand for it.


9 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:11 AM PST by CougarGA7 (Merry Christmas...THERE..I SAID IT...AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

The only way to have a Hillary win.


10 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:26 AM PST by bmwcyle (Washington DC RINO Hunting Guide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SF Republican

These weasels know that the urban masses are ignorant, and choose to ignore the wise words of our founding fathers about democracy being the weakest form of government.

Representative republic all the way baby!

tSG


11 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:37 AM PST by alkaloid2 (Your favorite site is now www.theSuperGenius.com! You are commanded!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: forYourChildrenVote4Bush

Bingo!


12 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:40 AM PST by DennisR (Look around - there are countless observable hints that God exists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

How about One Congressional District = 1 Electoral Vote. Think our girl Dianne would go for that? Not in your lifetime.


13 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:42 AM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

I say OK if the amendment also includes repealing the 17th amendment.


14 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:47 AM PST by NEPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SF Republican

Feinstein is a poster child for civilian ownership of .50bmg rifles. She wants to disarm the masses and then bring looney liberal tyranny of the coasts to the entire country.

Molon labe you ghoul, that goes for my guns and the electoral college.


15 posted on 12/23/2004 8:45:54 AM PST by boofus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
"The Electoral College is I am an anachronism, and the time has come to bring our democracy me into the 21st century," Feinstein said in a statement.
16 posted on 12/23/2004 8:46:40 AM PST by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forYourChildrenVote4Bush

As much as I hate to say it "I agree with this DemoRAT". The electoral college has long outlived it's usefulness. With todays communications setup we don't need it.


17 posted on 12/23/2004 8:46:48 AM PST by snowman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Senator! Sit down and shut up!

The Elector College serves a very important purpose, like it or not. It keeps heavily populated areas from domineering the election.

Had there been no Electoral College in '00 or '04, states like NM, NH, etc., would have had little-to-no significance. Elections would be determined by NYC, LA, DFW, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago.

The Founding Fathers had much more wisdom and insight, and a whole lot less polical agenda than YOU, Diane. They created the Electoral College to give better representation and significance to the rural areas. It is amazing the insights they had.

It is frightening the idiocy contemporary lawmakers show---you wanting to eliminate the Electoral College; Hatch and others wanting to allow foreigners to run for the Presidency; Hatch wanting to allow foreigners to vote in OUR election.


18 posted on 12/23/2004 8:47:27 AM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

I don't think so! The system while flawed has worked well for over 200 years!


19 posted on 12/23/2004 8:47:27 AM PST by TMSuchman (American by birth,rebel by choice, MARINE BY GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snowman1

You are highly confused. It is needed more now than ever.


20 posted on 12/23/2004 8:47:37 AM PST by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Dock her salary for wasting time.


21 posted on 12/23/2004 8:47:41 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

If you wish to observe one person---one vote in action----take a hard look at what is happening here in Washington State governor's election. It sucks!!!


22 posted on 12/23/2004 8:47:48 AM PST by Parmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NEPA

I'm with you there.


23 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:00 AM PST by Repealthe17thAmendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
"The Electoral College is an anachronism, and the time has come to bring our democracy into the 21st century,"

And then maybe we should push for a constitutional amendment that would require officials elected US senate or house seats to actually know what kind of government they're working in.

It's not a democracy. It's a Federal Republic.

24 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:01 AM PST by cowboyway (My Hero's have always been cowboys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

great use of her time....endlessly trying to do something she can't acheive should keep her out of the way of real work.


25 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:34 AM PST by The Wizard (DemonRATS: enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

"A Republic, if you can keep it" -- Benjamin Franklin 9/17/1787

"I want a pure democracy" -- Feinstein circa 2004

Sorry there toots, I'll follow Franklin.
26 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:38 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Yeah, I bet this one gets a lot of traction. I think Di should devote ALL of her time and resources working on this isse.


27 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:39 AM PST by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

The headline should read "Feinstein knows better than Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Paterson, Franklin, and other dead founding fathers"


28 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:43 AM PST by frog_jerk_2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

Leahy from VT comes to mind immediately.


29 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:49 AM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

"I dream of a day when 5 or 6 major cities will have total control over who becomes the US president. The voters in about 45 states will have no say in the matter! Those ignorant rubes don't deserve to vote at all! Now ... all I have to do is convince two-thirds of those god-forsaken states to vote for a Constitutional Amendment that will drastically reduce their own political relevance .... hmmmmmm ... how can I do that? Maybe Hillary has an idea ..."


30 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:53 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (The fourth estate is a fifth column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

She's proposing it because she knows if a California Constitutional amendment passes, dividing up the electoral votes between vote-getters, then California will become even more irrelevant in Presidential elections, and that Republican dominance of the White House will last for decades, until another sea change in American and California politics.


31 posted on 12/23/2004 8:49:06 AM PST by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

Smells like old crusty is giving orders again. '08 starts now.


32 posted on 12/23/2004 8:49:14 AM PST by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
Popular election of the president is not a new idea. It was proposed in its simplest form by James Wilson, one of the lesser known delegates from Pennsylvania, at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. His argument was that, inasmuch as the presidency was a national office, it should be chosen by popular vote regardless of state. Neither the Nationalists nor the States' Men were receptive to the argument, and it went nowhere.

The recipe for electing the president was cobbled together in the final days of the Convention. Nobody was satisfied with it, but it was the best the combined minds of the Convention could come up with.

In December 1829, Andrew Jackson, in his annual message to Congress, argued in favor of a constitutional amendment to elect the president by popular vote. Jackson argued that we were no longer a republic, but a democracy, and the Constitution needed to be updated to reflect that fact. (He also proposed direct election of senators.) Jackson's idea was too far out in front of the public, and it went nowhere.

After the close call in 1968, several plans were brought forward. One was a revival of Jackson's 1829 suggestion. The other, proposed by Republican senators Everett Dirksen of Illinois and Karl Mundt of South Dakota, suggested granting each congressional district one electoral vote and each state two electoral votes.

Both ideas continued to gather adherents in the Seventies, but then the momentum went out of the movement.

Maine and Nebraska, however, decided to follow the Dirksen-Mundt idea on their own. Both states assign electoral votes by congressional district and assign two votes to the state in general.

33 posted on 12/23/2004 8:49:21 AM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KJacob

ping


34 posted on 12/23/2004 8:49:46 AM PST by KJacob (Faith is not believing God can. It is knowing God will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
This ought to keep her busy for a while.

Is she actually clueless enough to believe that she could actually succeed in this dopey impossible quest, or is she just fundraising?

35 posted on 12/23/2004 8:50:02 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snowman1

You might outta rethink that.


36 posted on 12/23/2004 8:50:41 AM PST by processing please hold (Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
Well, you know that only Californians and New Yorkers know best who should be president. We can't leave it up to those pickup driving animal-killers in the Midwest and the South.

< /sarcasm >

37 posted on 12/23/2004 8:50:43 AM PST by Jagdgewehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

This lady is sitting in congress and she doesn't even know what form of government we have! Democracy?? Not on your life, lady. She needs to resign immediately and go home. She's too ingnorant to serve the public. People elected her?


38 posted on 12/23/2004 8:50:58 AM PST by whereasandsoforth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee; SF Republican
- You first...   ...if she represented Idaho?

She needs to set an example right there in California by having her own state apportion electoral delegates per popular vote-- like Maine does..   Of course that would just give the Republicans an even bigger advantage but she says that democracy is the goal above all else.

39 posted on 12/23/2004 8:51:02 AM PST by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: snowman1
You are highly mistaken sir. With no electoral college, campaigns will only focus on the 20 most populous cities. States with smaller populations will never even get the slightest look or the slightest consideration when a president that is thinking about reelection is making decisions.

Our founding fathers were against Democracy because they believed that what they called "mob rule" would be detrimental to the country. They are just as right today as they were back then.
40 posted on 12/23/2004 8:51:56 AM PST by CougarGA7 (Merry Christmas...THERE..I SAID IT...AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD

She'll get 37 states when Bill goes a year being faithful to Hillary...I think we are safe.


41 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:12 AM PST by Keith (NOW, MORE THAN EVER....IT'S ABOUT THE JUDGES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CougarGA7

You're absolutely right... states like Delaware, Rhode Island, Wyoming and South Dakota that only have 3 electoral votes will never go for this. Without the Electoral College, those states lose what little power they have, and control of national elections goes to the 7 or 8 states with the highest populations (CA, TX, NY, FL, IL, MI, OH, PA). Right now California has 55 electoral votes, Rhode Island 3. Under a system based only on popular vote, without the Electoral College, it would be the equivalent of giving California 100 electoral votes and Rhode Island 3, since California has about 34 million people and Rhode Island has just over 1 million.


42 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:19 AM PST by mysto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: snowman1
As much as I hate to say it "I agree with this DemoRAT". The electoral college has long outlived it's usefulness. With todays communications setup we don't need it.

I believe if you had sat and thought about something to say that was as inappropriate as it could possibly be given the times we live in today, you could not possibly have come up with something better then this to accomplish the task.

43 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:19 AM PST by JoeV1 (The Democrats-The unlawful and corrupt leading the uneducated and blind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
"A Republic, if you can keep it" -- Benjamin Franklin 9/17/1787


I didn't realize he meant: if you can keep it by prohibiting the elected legislators from trying to take it away from the citizenry.
44 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:27 AM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: snowman1

It wasn't created to overcome communication difficulties. It was set up to ensure that the low-population states had some influence on the presidency.


45 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:31 AM PST by Squawk 8888
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: snowman1
With todays communications setup we don't need it.

What does this have to do with Mob rule? Removing the electoral college will eventually accomplish that. If we are going to remove the electoral college we need to rename the United States of America to the United People of America...More apathy will set in because voters not in the majority would matter less.

46 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:32 AM PST by frog_jerk_2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: alkaloid2
The Democrats truly want to destroy our Constitutional Republic. This ploy dovetails with their incessant cry of "Every vote counts". They will use the fallacious argument that with the Electoral College if your guy/gal doesn't win, then your vote didn't count.

With the courts ruling across the country in seemingly "liberal lockstep", the Electoral College is one of the greatest bastions in the preservation of our Great Republic.

Unfortunately, today, nothing is taught in civics or social studies classes about the fact that we are a Republic and not a Democracy and why the difference matters.
47 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:40 AM PST by Hornet19 (Know what happens to a Democrat that takes Viagra? He just gets a little taller.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: geedee

Well, that's just it...with her leftist bent, there's no way the people of the Great State of Idaho would have her as their Senator.


48 posted on 12/23/2004 8:54:22 AM PST by GOP_Raider (Win, Lose or Tie...Raiders Til I Die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

Biden in Delaware...


49 posted on 12/23/2004 8:54:25 AM PST by Keith (NOW, MORE THAN EVER....IT'S ABOUT THE JUDGES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 1066AD
Ummmm . . .doncha need 36 states to ratify any Amendment to the Constitution? Can you see, Montana, Idaho, the Dakotas and other less populous states voting for the change? I think not.

This will go the way of the ERA.

50 posted on 12/23/2004 8:54:27 AM PST by misharu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-167 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson