Reorganizing the electoral college

[cphilip]

How so? Under the proposal, the Colorado legislature will select nine electors from a larger pool of electors, each of which has pledged support to a party, based on proportional popular vote. These electors will then cast their votes in the manner described in the 12th Amendment.

Thats not what I read at all. They would cast thier vote proportionaly to the popular election is what I read. No matter who selects them or how.

For instance if they vote was 60% bush and 40% Kerry they would vote 5.0 for bush and 4.0 for Kerry (math rounded off because I do not realy know how they propose to deal with that for Kerry.. just a crude example for the sake of discussion)

So this is what I am reading they are proposing. Am I off on that? Sounds exactly like what they are proposing to do.....And so they would not then meet, vote and send forth their states "choice" for a presidential nominee. They would be sending forth their "choices".... thats the key difference. In order to cast their vote according to the 12th amendment there is one final choice sent forth. Tallys of the votes to get there...are in the envelope...but just in the envelope...for record keeping purposes. They are not what then is considered. Thats how I read it. And I think its fairly plainly layed out. What it seems this law wants to do is to not make that final decision and just give a proportional list of how the final POPULAR vote went (using the Legistature to proportion it) and send forth that sub tally. Not the final votes results. Who won? Well they say not that. They say this is how our state was divided. Thats not what Amendment 12 asks them to do.

Now I am not saying in the long run there is not better ways. And lord knows we have tweeked the Electoral College to fit the changes in times before. But it is a Federal Issue to do that. And its not the proper place to do that at the state level. And what I am seeing proposed in effect changes the Electoral College proceedure so much, that if all States did it , it would make its buffer and purpose moot. And I would not like to see that effect in the long run on the Federation. I do not agree with people who say we do not think regionaly and are such an amalgum that it matters not anymore. I see over and over again regional differences that need to be respected. And they are with the electoral college "winner takes the spoils approach. It is not yet time were we all think alike in all parts of our country. And respecting those differences and allowing for thier representation is a wonderfull thing about America.

[cphilip]

Ok well lets move into some other related aspects of this.

Regardless of how we think they should do it. And regardless of how you elect these Electoral College peeps.... they still do not HAVE to do what they are sent to do. Which I think it really some of your points. But those are individual miss actions or whatever you want to call them. I consider it in most cases a sell out of all the people that sent them to do a job but thats just me...

But some of them are amuzing and interesting.

I was reading this last night and just now refound one similar to the one I had seen.

Good stuff! Politics was nasty all the way back then!

http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm

[aaron_mag]

Electoral college is old and outdated. It should be axed. You have to remember in the old days we didn't have this nifty thing like radio, television, and the internet.

We have the ability and means to do a popular vote. People know the candidates from seeing them on the above mentioned mediums. So why do we need this archaic system? Axe it. This way the minority in each state gets to have their votes count in the general election. Popular election with winner take all...

No more of these guys losing the popular election but then winning the electoral college, then claiming they have some sort of 'mandate from the people'.

[Hasty8]

because communism is evil?

duh.

My, what a typical knee-jerk reaction. Communism is not evil. How it has been used by Stalin, Mao and Castro certainly is evil but Communism was never meant to be anything more than a way for the working class, who has forever had nothing of their own to sell other than their labor, to find common standing among the land owners and middle classes.

[Hasty8]

Electoral college is old and outdated. It should be axed. You have to remember in the old days we didn't have this nifty thing like radio, television, and the internet.

We have the ability and means to do a popular vote. People know the candidates from seeing them on the above mentioned mediums. So why do we need this archaic system? Axe it. This way the minority in each state gets to have their votes count in the general election. Popular election with winner take all...

No more of these guys losing the popular election but then winning the electoral college, then claiming they have some sort of 'mandate from the people'.

Like the popular election worked so well last year?

With hundreds of thousands of military votes not counting?

With hundreds of thousands of citizens being disenfranchized?

As it stands this year, over half of the nationalized immagrants in this country, who became citizens between 2000 and Nov 1 of this year will not be able to vote due to registration backlogs.

While the system has it's quirks there is no need to just "overhaul" or "axe" it. And making it all one popular vote is not likely to draw out any more than the system we have now.

I won't even touch the last paragraph.

[spantol]

cphilip-

Here's the text of the proposed amendment. It's not the easiest read. My interpretation of it was as I described above. On a second (and third and fourth) read, I'm not as sure, but I'd still interpret it that way. See section 13, clause 2, which seems to imply that the electors will be selected based on the proportional popular vote.

To be clear, I agree with you in principle--the electoral college is there for a reason, and if you're going to screw with it, you ought to think things through carefully. Colorado isn't doing that.

[aaron_mag]

Like the popular election worked so well last year?

With hundreds of thousands of military votes not counting?

With hundreds of thousands of citizens being disenfranchized?

As it stands this year, over half of the nationalized immagrants in this country, who became citizens between 2000 and Nov 1 of this year will not be able to vote due to registration backlogs.

While the system has it's quirks there is no need to just "overhaul" or "axe" it. And making it all one popular vote is not likely to draw out any more than the system we have now.

I won't even touch the last paragraph.

Ummm....well maybe it would keep the person who lost the popular election from winning the presidency. Do you think overhauling it is likely to at least draw out that much from the system?

As it stands now a guy could carry several states by a margin of 70 percent and barely lose the election in key states and still lose the election (despite being the overwhelming majority favorite). Now this is not what happened in the 2000 election (it wasn't a landside loss), but it could happen.

[Destructo6]

Communism was never meant to be anything more than a way for the working class, who has forever had nothing of their own to sell other than their labor, to find common standing among the land owners and middle classes.

It was a way for Marx and Engels to gain the power and prestige of the growing class of merchants that they felt was righteously theirs. Using a Whiggish understanding of history to predict the future whose reality did not jibe with the predictions. They placed the State, as the representative of "the people", above the right of individuals as derrived from Rosseau and Robespierre, with similar outcomes.

There's just a host of problems with the theory and practice of communism.

[gamarada717]

Well, the reason that the electoral college was started was because Thomas Jefferson believed the average man not smart enough to govern himself.

[Hasty8]

Well, the reason that the electoral college was started was because Thomas Jefferson believed the average man not smart enough to govern himself.

Which has been proven time and time again.

As far as I'm concerned I'll go with the age old maxim - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

The elctoral college works. It allows those states with a smaller population to have a voice in the election. If we went soley based on popular vote then only those states with significant poulation masses would be catered to and entire states would be disenfranchised of their right to be heard in the government.

[Hasty8]

It was a way for Marx and Engels to gain the power and prestige of the growing class of merchants that they felt was righteously theirs. Using a Whiggish understanding of history to predict the future whose reality did not jibe with the predictions. They placed the State, as the representative of "the people", above the right of individuals as derrived from Rosseau and Robespierre, with similar outcomes.

There's just a host of problems with the theory and practice of communism.

I agree with every that you said except for the theory I think in theory it can work but as soon as humans get involved things go a tad wacky.

Regardless, I still think what we have here is best. A strong Republic with significant democratic procedures.

[-Carnifex-]

We can just hope that this gets passed and other states do the same.

[spantol]

Why, exactly?

We can just hope that this gets passed and other states do the same.

[ShooterJM]

Well, the reason that the electoral college was started was because Thomas Jefferson believed the average man not smart enough to govern himself.

I don't disagree with that.

[Kevmaster]

the average man still isnt smart enough to govern himself.

and if colorado's ammendment passes, there will be a whale of legal suits because it is retroactive to THIS election. thats what messesd up about it

and, imho,the electoral college and how stateschoose electors should be left alone