Comments on: Voting Rights Historian Comments On California Republican Initiative to Alter Electoral College http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 13:28:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=7077 By: AllAboutVoting http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-154863 AllAboutVoting Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:26:29 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-154863 Note that the latest online version of the LA Times article now includes this text: --- FOR THE RECORD: Presidential politics: The headline on an article by Alexander Keyssar in the Oct. 28 Opinion section suggested that the author supports divvying up electoral votes by congressional districts. He supports the idea of a national popular election that would eliminate the electoral college altogether. --- An embarrassingly derivative post about this article on my site: http://allaboutvoting.com/2007/11/07/alex-keyssar-on-how-not-to-choose-a-president/ Note that the latest online version of the LA Times article now includes this text:

—
FOR THE RECORD:
Presidential politics: The headline on an article by Alexander Keyssar in the Oct. 28 Opinion section suggested that the author supports divvying up electoral votes by congressional districts. He supports the idea of a national popular election that would eliminate the electoral college altogether.
—

An embarrassingly derivative post about this article on my site:
http://allaboutvoting.com/2007/11/07/alex-keyssar-on-how-not-to-choose-a-president/

]]> By: Alex Keyssar http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-151029 Alex Keyssar Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:37:23 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-151029 Just to follow up on my earlier email and various things that have appeared on the internet: The LAtimes is printing a correction about the misleading title and subtitle of the piece as they first published it. They have also changed the title and subtitle in the electronic archive. I would hope that people would now refer to that updated version. Thanks. I'm always happy to defend my actual views, but it's been frustrating trying to defend a misleading set of titles that were written by someone else. Just to follow up on my earlier email and various things that have appeared on the internet: The LAtimes is printing a correction about the misleading title and subtitle of the piece as they first published it. They have also changed the title and subtitle in the electronic archive. I would hope that people would now refer to that updated version. Thanks. I’m always happy to defend my actual views, but it’s been frustrating trying to defend a misleading set of titles that were written by someone else.

]]> By: AllAboutVoting http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148362 AllAboutVoting Mon, 29 Oct 2007 22:02:18 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148362 ETJB #13: Can you clarify what a "slate of Electors" is? Are you proposing having the electors for each state be 100% for a single party as is common right now? Under that proposal you could continue to have most of the problems that get people riled up to want a NPV in the first place: * most places are not 'battlegrounds' and so get no attention from candidates * winner of election could have not won the popular vote ETJB #13: Can you clarify what a “slate of Electors” is? Are you proposing having the electors for each state be 100% for a single party as is common right now?

Under that proposal you could continue to have most of the problems that get people riled up to want a NPV in the first place:
* most places are not ‘battlegrounds’ and so get no attention from candidates
* winner of election could have not won the popular vote

]]> By: ETJB http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148330 ETJB Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:00:25 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148330 (1) We should just have each state use IRV to decide which slate of Electors are chosen. That would not need an amendment, and would deal with the spoiler problem, while allowing people to vote for a third party. (2) We could allow states with multi-US House seats to use some form of PR, thus repealing a 1960s law. Might be easier then an amendment. (3) We could do something about the current Presidential Debates. Yeah, this may be off topic, I can think of over a dozen different alternatives to a public debate then the de facto rule; invite the two, and no one else. (1) We should just have each state use IRV to decide which slate of Electors are chosen. That would not need an amendment, and would deal with the spoiler problem, while allowing people to vote for a third party.

(2) We could allow states with multi-US House seats to use some form of PR, thus repealing a 1960s law. Might be easier then an amendment.

(3) We could do something about the current Presidential Debates. Yeah, this may be off topic, I can think of over a dozen different alternatives to a public debate then the de facto rule; invite the two, and no one else.

]]> By: Deemer from California http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148265 Deemer from California Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:17:22 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148265 I say let the Republicans spend whatever they need to get this legislation passed. After all, it is their money to spend. Many times, electoral "reform" ends up backfiring on political activists. The idea is intri- ging & if California should approve it, then to be truly fair the National Republican Party should endorse this proposal for all the States as a matter of equity & fairness. It would be more useful if this idea was able to garner a few votes for the alternate parties. It has occurred in the past, and would make for great political theater to have Congress have the final say on a Presidential election. I say let the Republicans spend whatever they need to
get this legislation passed. After all, it is their
money to spend. Many times, electoral “reform” ends up
backfiring on political activists. The idea is intri-
ging & if California should approve it, then to be
truly fair the National Republican Party should endorse
this proposal for all the States as a matter of equity
& fairness. It would be more useful if this idea was
able to garner a few votes for the alternate parties.
It has occurred in the past, and would make for great
political theater to have Congress have the final say
on a Presidential election.

]]> By: AllAboutVoting http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148258 AllAboutVoting Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:51:55 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148258 >[David #9]NPV is a very interesting proposal but does >nothing to address the so-called “spoiler” issue Agree. For my part, I support NPV but am skeptical of the legality and practicalness of the inter-state compact based NPV approach. In particular it makes assumptions about the data collected by and reported by states <b>that are not in the compact</b> that I consider overly restrictive. For example, if a state not in the compact uses an alternate voting system like IRV or (much better in my view) Approval voting it is unclear to me how states in the compact would be able to determine who the national popular vote winner was. I would like to see NPV using Approval voting at the national level. I've no idea of how to get there but I know that the republican backed partitioning of CA into districts is definitely not it. It is just a partisan power play from my viewpoint. >[David #9]NPV is a very interesting proposal but does
>nothing to address the so-called “spoiler” issue
Agree.

For my part, I support NPV but am skeptical of the legality and practicalness of the inter-state compact based NPV approach. In particular it makes assumptions about the data collected by and reported by states that are not in the compact that I consider overly restrictive. For example, if a state not in the compact uses an alternate voting system like IRV or (much better in my view) Approval voting it is unclear to me how states in the compact would be able to determine who the national popular vote winner was.

I would like to see NPV using Approval voting at the national level. I’ve no idea of how to get there but I know that the republican backed partitioning of CA into districts is definitely not it. It is just a partisan power play from my viewpoint.

]]> By: Joel http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148153 Joel Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:52:56 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148153 NPV as implemented would be a plurality election. I don't know how a majority clause would work with the interstate compacts, if it even could. I would argue that NPV would be a little better than what we have now, since every vote would count nationwide. However, my preference would be an amendment with a majority requirement as well. NPV as implemented would be a plurality election. I don’t know how a majority clause would work with the interstate compacts, if it even could. I would argue that NPV would be a little better than what we have now, since every vote would count nationwide. However, my preference would be an amendment with a majority requirement as well.

]]> By: David Gaines http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148131 David Gaines Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:27:25 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148131 NPV is a very interesting proposal but does nothing to address the so-called "spoiler" issue under which 3rd party presidential candidates have to labor currently. Also, unless I misunderstand the current NPV proposal, it does not require a majority, only a plurality, which is no better than what we have now. I would be far more inclined to support a combination of NPV (one person = one vote) and IRV (guaranteed majority and no "spoiling"). NPV is a very interesting proposal but does nothing to address the so-called “spoiler” issue under which 3rd party presidential candidates have to labor currently. Also, unless I misunderstand the current NPV proposal, it does not require a majority, only a plurality, which is no better than what we have now. I would be far more inclined to support a combination of NPV (one person = one vote) and IRV (guaranteed majority and no “spoiling”).

]]> By: Tony Andrade http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148125 Tony Andrade Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:08:22 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148125 A Really Good Idea! If this legislation passes California’s votes will no longer ALL be controlled by the big city political machines (LA/SF) and the major market liberal media. California will become competitive again. Presidential candidates will have to campaign for your vote – in suburbs, small towns and rural areas - and your vote WILL matter. If it passes, the reform will help stamp out corruption by making vote fraud ineffective – those schemes would only affect one electoral vote in one district – and not all 58 votes for the whole state. It will virtually eliminate the chance of a repeat of the Florida debacle in California in the event of a close vote – preventing both the uncertainty and the anger and long-lasting animosity created by that dispute. Of course, there is the chance minor parties may be able to win an electoral vote or two – the Greens along the coast, the Libertarians in a foothill or suburban district. What is important is EVERYONE’S vote will matter and everyone will know it. The social impact will mean less bitterness – resulting in more social and political stability. A Really Good Idea!
If this legislation passes California’s votes will no
longer ALL be controlled by the big city political
machines (LA/SF) and the major market liberal media.
California will become competitive again.
Presidential candidates will have to campaign
for your vote – in suburbs, small towns and rural
areas – and your vote WILL matter.
If it passes, the reform will help stamp out corruption
by making vote fraud ineffective – those schemes
would only affect one electoral vote in one
district – and not all 58 votes for the whole state.
It will virtually eliminate the chance of a repeat
of the Florida debacle in California in the event
of a close vote – preventing both the uncertainty
and the anger and long-lasting animosity created
by that dispute.
Of course, there is the chance minor parties may
be able to win an electoral vote or two – the
Greens along the coast, the Libertarians in a
foothill or suburban district.
What is important is EVERYONE’S vote will
matter and everyone will know it.
The social impact will mean less bitterness –
resulting in more social and political stability.

]]> By: Joel http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-148122 Joel Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:56:51 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/28/voting-rights-historian-defends-californiarepublican-initiative-to-alter-electoral-college/#comment-148122 Alot of interesting comments on this. Being in a poli-sci class right now, yes, the Constitution is inherently undemocratic. That being the case, short of a constitutional convention; a national discussion, on this and many other reforms, NPV, in my opinion, would be worth a try. It wouldn't be as permanent as an amendment. It would give the nation a taste of what popular election would be like. Although, the way NPV has to be approved by several states, one might argue this might be the same approach to an amendment process as well. Alot of interesting comments on this. Being in a poli-sci class right now, yes, the Constitution is inherently undemocratic. That being the case, short of a constitutional convention; a national discussion, on this and many other reforms, NPV, in my opinion, would be worth a try. It wouldn’t be as permanent as an amendment. It would give the nation a taste of what popular election would be like. Although, the way NPV has to be approved by several states, one might argue this might be the same approach to an amendment process as well.

]]>