Skip to comments.California Assembly approves electoral vote change
Posted on 05/19/2011 6:11:55 PM PDT by SmithL
Lawmakers have taken a step to make California more relevant in presidential politics, voting to give the state's electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote.
The state Assembly passed AB459 on Thursday on a 43-18 vote, sending it to the state Senate. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
For those in less liberal Northern California... your vote just became obsolete...
I don’t understand why California would do this. Their EVs will almost always go to a Democrat. This makes it possible for a Republican to win them all. It makes no sense, since California is completely dominated by Democrats.
If I read thiis right the democrats gave the GOP some votes.
We are such dorks here in CA....pathetic.
This is bizarre.
GROSS CONCEPTUAL ERROR. Freaking morons.
More and more like Europe everyday.
This is a good thing. Cali hasn’t gone Republican for a long time, so it doesn’t hurt our side at all. Woo Hoo!
This is a huge threat to our freedom. The left-wing will manipulate the vote in every election under a system of the popular vote.
Out of all of the very difficult issues we all have to deal with this one is possibily the most dangerous. This is a straight forward effort by socialists to undermine the electoral process and rig elections.
There, Fixed it. With CA's electors chosen by the popular vote in the entire country, then candidates will not care about issues specific to CA.
Typical lib stepping on their own crank. They just put CA in play for the GOP. There’s no need for the GOP pres candidate in CA, all she or he has to do is do well in the other states and CA’s electoral votes will give the GOP the WH.
When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
My cesspool of a state did the same thing not long ago, although there may be a caveat that a certain number of states have to approve the same law for it to take effect.
Do they really think it it impossible for a Republican to win the popular vote yet lose the electoral college? The first time that happens you will see hysterical liberals (are there any other kind?) rushing into court the day after to have these very laws retroactively declared void.
Imagine the entertainment that will provide us, in print and on video!
Thanks CA Dems!! You are all stupid stupid stupid!
Could you imagine the uproar if the 2000 vote was reversed and the pub won the popular vote by a slim margin but lost the electoral vote and suddenly Cali tips the whole thing to the pub because of this?
Close, actually it is a step toward making the Electoral College (constitution) immaterial.
With the courts already going beyond their intended limits, both houses of congress elected by popular vote, and socialists in charge of the democrat (and possibly republican) party - what would you expect?
You might want to take a close look at the bill. The way it was written here in Michigan allows us to opt out with no reason (when it looks like democrats will lose)
Fortunately its DOA here in Michigan for now.
“although there may be a caveat that a certain number of states have to approve the same law for it to take effect.”
The exact number which is equivalent to the number needed to elect the president. The liberals aren’t stupid.
Think of it as locking down a state so that you no longer need to spend any money defending it. When states are in play, you have to direct your money to defend it, even if it’s CA.
Now? Liberals don’t have to spend a dime in CA, because whatever they run nationally will be the only thing that counts.
I think you are right. Of course, this is a typical liberal attack on federalism and the constitution, but in this case it would benefit conservatives occasionally. If not for the early call of Florida, for example, G. W. Bush would have won the popular vote, and thus would have carried CA, making it not close at all.
This will indeed make parts of California more relevant. It will behoove candidates to campaign in the large cities where most of the votes are located.
If enough states pass this, and electoral votes go the way of the dinosaurs, then the most efficient way to win an election will be to get the majority of votes from high population centers, i.e. cities.
This will enfranchise urbanites and disenfranchise rural folks. So indirectly it will tend to favor liberals over conservatives, and therefore Democrats over Republicans.
The California Senate may be clueless about how to manage a budget, but they know exactly what they are doing when it comes to electioneering.
BTW, we already know how difficult/controversial statewide recounts are. What happens if we ever have a nationwide recount?
The only way to reverrse this is to eliminate public education!
They have been preaching democracy for 40 years and their efforts are now being rewarded!
This country is history, i’m glad i don’t have that many years left to live.
Absolutely correct. The communists/Democrat machine is setting this up by buying votes to win using fraudulent means. This is why they are going to rely heavily on the black and illegal Mexicans to pad the vote. Then by using the food stamp and entitlements to buy more votes they are certain to have the popular vote. The unions are controlled by the communists leaders and will go for the Democrat. Communists are cleaver that way and don't forget the chad count. Perfect opportunity to overthrow any election.
I still do not understand why they say Gore won the popular vote. Recounts done by the media over and over gain show Bush won not by a large number of votes but he did get more votes than Gore so wouldn’t Bush have the popular vote?
This will make California utterly irrelevant in presidential politics.
Why campaign here if the rest of the country decides where our votes go?
I do not believe this to be constitutional anyway; how can voters not from California be allowed to select our electorial votes?
The strategy will be to suppress the vote in targeted demographics and locations.
I'm beginning to think the same thing!
Because it makes it easier for them to get the total needed to cause the other states who have passed the law to activate.
People need to take a long hard look at it before they just declare it a non issue. I used to have the text of the proposal here in Michigan saved.
The way it was written would have allowed us to opt in or out at will which would be determined by the electors. I guarantee a close look in other states would show similar opt out clauses.
Obviously it was written that way to make sure a republican would be forced to win electoral votes unless a democrat won the popular vote.
“Or the idiot could be correct and end of the world is Saturday...”
Good enough, ive had a good life and have done 10 times more than most people and enjoyed every bit of it.
I live in Maryland and don't know of this. What are you talking about?
One thing that people often overlook when discussing this issue is the definition of “popular vote”. Each State has its own laws and procedures for counting votes. In those States where the vote isn’t close, it can also be imprecise. After all, why count and recount and squabble over provisional and absentee ballots when the outcome will not be affected? So who is it that has the ability and authority to certify a national “popular vote”, what procedures will they use, and how might someone challenge their ruling? This is a giant can of worms that the U.S. Constitution simply does not consider. Why open it?
...voting to give the state's electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular voteThis makes California competitive for Republicans for the first time in ages. Thank you, Demwits in the Cali legislature!
They’ve probably made sure to include an opt out clause like they did when they proposed it here in Michigan. When it looks like a GOP win they can opt out and make him win on electoral votes. If it looks like the democrat will win the popular vote they can opt in and give it to him.
Fortunately its dead here for now.
I don’t see how a state can over-ride a process that is deifined by the federal constitution for a federal election.
But hey who pays attention to that dusty old document any more. It’s hard to understand.
Nationally, the electoral college still would convene. What I fear is that California delegates and all other delegates from states that have chosen this approach, would then "vote their conscience" setting up a whole new constitutional crisis.
This could one day be disastrous.
It makes it so that if California lets illegals vote, by not protecting their ballot boxes, they can overwhelm the popular vote. It won’t help unless they trick enough small states into joining though. Can’t imagine a small state going for this.
No, it doesn’t make sense. Their state could go overwhelmingly Rat (as it has done since 1988) and a Republican would be awarded their EC votes.
Wouldn’t it be hilarious listening to the liberal heads explode on election night if Sarah won California.
If I recall correctly, this is a conspiracy by the left started by a college professor in 2001, where once they have more than half the electoral college votes in states that have passed similar legislation, it is all over. CA brings them much closer, and they have been close to passing in NY. This flies under the radar, the MSM totally ignores this, as if they don’t know it is going on. It is an obvious end around of the constitution and the amendment process.