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

San Francisco Chronicle (Online) ^ | 12/23/2004 | Edward Epstein

[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.

[Keith]

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

[mysto]

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.

[JoeV1]

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.

[TomGuy]

"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.

[Squawk 8888]

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.

[frog_jerk_2004]

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.

[Hornet19]

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.

[GOP_Raider]

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.

[Keith]

Biden in Delaware...

[misharu]

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.

[tom h]

Begging your pardon, the Electoral College has little to do with communication and more to do with ensuring that small and rural states have an influence on our national leaders. One commentator observed that the Electoral College, in effect, carries out the Founding Fathers' desire that "ties go to the winner of the most states," thereby preventing electoral dominance to candidates who just roll up huge majorities in large cities.

I wrote of this in another post a few weeks ago. Without LA and SF, Bush ties Kerry in California. Without 4 boroughs in NY, Bush wins NY state. Without Detroit and Pennsylvania, respectively, Bush wins Michigan and Pennsylvania, by larger margins than Kerry won those states. Without Chicago, Bush easily sweeps Illinois.

Straight-up direct voting was deliberately not chosen. I like things the way they are. Apportioning the votes based on congressional district isn't a bad idea -- it would preserve the basic intent of the Founding Fathers, also.

[BenLurkin]

So Fienstein hates America.

Wants to see it ruled by the urban mobs (placated only by a steady supply of 'bread and circuses').

No surprise I guess.

[Just mythoughts]

"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."


WHOA! Todays communications are the exact reason why we must never ever end the electoral college. Think about it, we have 50 states the state are equal, I personally do not wish to be dictated to by the likes of LA, NYC, Philly, Chicago, Seattle, and the rest of the BLUE Zones of this nation.

[ken5050]

Interesting...he might...if Frist goes ahead with the nuke option.

[DJ MacWoW]

This was posted 11-10-2000, you know, the last time democrats lost:

MIT PROFESSOR DEFENDS ELECTORAL COLLEGE (GREAT BASEBALL ANALOGY TO USE ON THE DEMS)

Was just listening on the radio and, at the top of the hour here in Chicago, they interviewed an MIT professor who made a great, easy-to-understand, recitation of why the electoral college system is the best and how it should be viewed by the public. In short, he said that the popular vote gives Americans "equal voting power" but the electoral college system provides "MAXIMUM voting power". He then went on to make a very interesting comparison that I am going to be using on all my Dem friends:

His analogy was to the World Series which, he explained, isn't decided on total runs scored in seven games but instead on the number of runs scored in EACH game. His reasoning is that a team can win by a single score in a single game (electoral) or, conversely, could lose even though they score more runs in six of seven games if they get beat badly in that seventh game (popular).

I realize we're all aware of these facts, but I thought it was a pretty straightforward way to explain why this popular vote angle Gore is trying to push - besides being unconstitutional - is flawed.

It was posted by lowteksh here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a0c1b1e3a53.htm

[William of Orange]

exactly, if electoral votes had been apportioned by congressional district (like Maine) the result would have been:

Bush 232 house seats + 62 (31 states times 2) = 294
Kerry 203 house seats + 38 (19 states times 2) = 241

result? Bush picks up 8 extra electoral votes

BUSH WINS AGAIN! :-)

[pabianice]

She truly is an idiot. I'm sure the west and south will line up to give away their electoral power.

[joe fonebone]

over 10,000 amendments to the constitution has been proposed in our over 230 year of existence........only 27 have made it all the way...............this will never happen.....

[writmeister]

Besides the fact that we are a republic and not a democracy, the Electoral College is one of the few brakes on RAT fraud. Can you imagine the vote numbers the Rats would produce out of NYC, LA, Philadelphia & Detroit, if they simply had to produce a popular vote majority.

[sr4402]

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.

As Sponge Bob said, in his recent movie, "Good Luck with that". About as good a chance as getting abortion out of the democratic party plank.