Michigan legislative action thread
Posted on 11/17/2014 6:46:56 AM PST by cotton1706
According to the Lansing State Journal, a GOP legislator, State Rep. Pete Lund, is introducing a bill to move Michigan's 16 Electoral College votes to a proportional basis instead of the current winner take all.
This has, rightly from their point of view, set off alarm bells at the likes of "progressive" site Daily Kos which sees the possibility of a Democratic 2016 presidential victory slipping away -- although "rigged" is how they describe it. On the other hand, it was that site which advised that the Black Democratic crossover vote in Mississippi's GOP runoff to defeat the conservative Republican Chris McDaniel (who came first in the primary) was "democracy." They now selectively rail re the Constitutional Article 2 Section 1 Michigan move to proportional EC vote as "undemocratic". The United States Constitution allows each state to determine how electoral votes are proportioned -- Maine and Nebraska do it by congressional district won, for example.
The Democratic Party has won Michigan by an average of 53% over the last five elections. Under the proposed change, instead of giving the Dems all 16 Electoral College votes, the split would be 11 to the Democrats and 5 to the Republicans under the new law.
If the law passes, and Michigan's vote in 2016 remains within historic bounds, it will give the GOP the equivalent of another Nebraska which has 5 EC votes which could be vital in a close race. As set out in an Electoral College analysis based on the GOP's midterm's Senate victories, the Republicans are very much in the hunt for 2016.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The socialists plans have been to control the cities, and through the cities, control electoral votes. De-coupling the cities/population areas will shatter the red state/blue state meme that the establishment has pieced together over the decades.
It would certainly be better than going to a Popular Vote election......that would be WAAAAAYYY too easy for the Dems to manipulate/cheat!
OUTSTANDING!! I had hopes that Pennsylvania was going to do the same several years ago (to defang the ‘RATS voter fraud in Philadelphia) but, apparently, some GOPe type inexplicably derailed it in the PA legislature. Now despite an even larger dominance of the Republicans in the legislature the fact that the incoming governor is a ‘RAT eliminates the possibility during the ‘RATS term in office.
This certainly would make Michigan relevant again.
I do not like the idea of each state having different rules for how we elect Federal politicians. If Michigan does this...why not all the states?
I am actually not excited how each state gets to determine their congressional districts either...each state doing it a different way.
Seems to me there is just too much room for corruption when each state can decide their own system of electing federal pols...like President...etc.
I hate to tell you this but the states already have different rules on how to elect “federal politicians”. In fact some states are already dividing their electoral votes.
I wish we elected senators the same way.
As long as it’s the liberal states that do it, im all for it :)
In my view, you have it completely backwards. The Federal government did not create the states, the states created the federal government. So it’s completely appropriate for the people, through their legislatures, to determine how their representatives to the federal legislature, should be chosen.
Its a great deterrent to fraud. Obama could get a billion votes in Detroit and it still wouldn’t matter.
Yes, I remember that the moderate GOP speaker or senate president or whatever derailing this idea in PA. It had Obama and the democrats panicking. It’s called the Keystone state for a reason! No democrat has won the presidency without it since Truman.
I, too, had been advocating this change, when we did in Kansas and though it didn’t make much difference when we held our Caucus prior to the 2012 general election, it really helped realize just how many Kansans were conservatives and desired less of government than those that desired, eh more, shall we say.
The same holds true for places like Texas and AZ. Let each state decide what is best.
Of course, that makes sense, since the Federal government is a creation of the States, and not the other way around.
/johnny
/johnny
Then take it up with the Founding Fathers. They actually believed in the sovereignty of the states. Thus, the Constitution allows for the states to select EC electors in the manner determined by each state. State sovereignty is meant to be a check on the Federal government. Why would you want to destroy what little is actually left of that idea?
Maine and Nebraska already divide their electoral votes.
Michigan doing this would definitely help a little bit, but the math is still on the difficult side. Instead of having to run the table on swing states, this would give the Republican nominee breathing room so that he could afford to lose 1 or 2 of the non-heavyweight swing states.
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.