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

To: Former Military Chick

Electoral College is great, There should be a limit on the number of electors from a state before a state needs to split into two. California is insane, that monster needs to be split into three states.


9 posted on 08/28/2004 11:44:29 PM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dila813

The way that state votes, it might do well to find another way. Different parts of CA vote with the conservatives. They are just outmanned do to the rest of the state. imho


12 posted on 08/28/2004 11:48:25 PM PDT by Former Military Chick (I previously posted under Military Chick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
Nebraka & Maine dish out EC votes based on how the prez vote goes in each distict.
Nebraka & Maine have it right, and I wish CA would follow their lead.
If they did, Kerry would end up 30 EC votes instead of 54.

As a side note Ca would have been originaly 2 states but all the population was up north with the gold rush and new states were by default non-slave states.
The south would not have allowed it.

38 posted on 08/29/2004 12:01:08 AM PDT by TeleStraightShooter (Sorry Kerry, you're 3 decimal places adrift: 3,000,000 not 3,000 "displaced"/murdered SE Asians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813

"There should be a limit on the number of electors from a state before a state needs to split into two."

Now THAT'S a reform worth discussing. Too bad the bien pensants at the Times couldn't think of it. I imagine there a lot of conservatives in Cali who wouldn't mind being in their own Semi-Cali state. For a variety of reasons.


90 posted on 08/29/2004 1:39:17 AM PDT by jocon307 (That's allowed, as long as we all vote for W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
California is insane, that monster needs to be split into three states.

Absolutely! And, think of the impacts on the Senate with four more Senators.

-PJ

93 posted on 08/29/2004 1:42:00 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813

The only way we should change the system, if at all, is to have an ever MORE federalist electoral college:

Instead of winner-take-all states, how about the following:

A victory in a single congressional district = 1 EV.

A victory statewide = 2 EV.

This would open up areas within states to political competition. For example, in California there is a large number of conservatives, but the state they're slightly outmnumbered by libs. Same goes for upstate NY, southern illinois, North Florida, Western Pennsylvania, and many other places.

I've heard a lot of conservatives propose this idea, and the common counterargument is a growth in gerrymandering. My response: so what!

If congressional district lines were more important, wouldn't that make who controls the state legislature more important? And if that were the case, wouldn't that in effect devolve power away from the Federal Government and back to the states???

It would bring us back closer to the days when control of the state legislature was more important than federal seats! That was before the 17th Amendment, when senators were appointed by the legislatures.

If this happened in the last election, Bush would have won by by more votes.

30 states voted for Bush, which would give him 60 EV from state-wide races (senatorial representation). Al Gore would have gotten 40 EV. If everybody voted according to their congressional district, Bush would have 228 EV from the Congressional EVs.

That's 288 EV for Bush, 250 EV for Gore. If democrats wanted to increase their electoral prospects, they would have to strengthen their appeal at the LOCAL level. No longer can a presidential candidate put a slick gloss on a campaign, bite their lip, promise to "feel their pain", and ride on positive media coverage. Support would have to be built from the ground up. The executive branch would be weak, like the constitution intended. States would have more power as well.

Thoughts???


137 posted on 08/29/2004 2:51:07 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813

"Electoral College is great, There should be a limit on the number of electors from a state before a state needs to split into two. California is insane, that monster needs to be split into three states."

-- There was actually a movement in Northern California to split off in the early 1990s. It was during the drought, and the heavily-populated Southern half of the state got the legislature to approve higher water prices and water rationing in the North, while Southern Californians had no such restrictions or even higher prices. The two halves of the state are very different. Even in SoCal there's a diofference politically. San Diego is considered a Republican city, while L.A. is teeming with liberals.


154 posted on 08/29/2004 3:15:23 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
California is insane, that monster needs to be split into three states.

Totally agree. California, taken alone, would be the fifth largest economy in the world. I do not think the founders of this country intended for a single state to have this much power over the rest of the nation. Splitting it into three states makes perfect sense. Of course, Texas and New York would need to be split in two to keep it consistent. Florida is getting close to needing to be split in two.

The Electoral College is great. Otherwise, candidates would be forced to campaign only in big cities, totally ignoring rural areas and sparsely populated states.

166 posted on 08/29/2004 3:55:02 AM PDT by SamAdams76 (Bush 53%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
California is insane, that monster needs to be split into three states.

I think many Californians would agree.
176 posted on 08/29/2004 5:00:14 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

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