« Three Friday Afternoon Human Interest Stories | Main | Snow the Liar Leaving White House »

Republican Crooks Trying to Steal More Elections

fair.png

They're up to their old tricks again. Republican Party operatives are trying to rig the system so they can steal elections that they can't win fair and square. California Senator Barbara Boxer exposes their latest scam which is to alter the way California's electoral votes are distributed.

Most states in the union, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska, allocate their electoral votes with a winner-take-all method. Therefore, if a candidate wins a state by just a single vote, he or she gets all of that state's electoral votes. This archaic system is what allowed George W. Bush to become President in 2000 even though Al Gore received half a million more votes nationwide.

While I agree that the electoral college system needs to be reformed so that our elections more accurately reflect the will of the people, what the Republicans are trying to do is to essentially rig the system by changing the way California's votes are distributed while ignoring large states like Florida and Texas that typically turn for the Republican candidate. Instead of awarding all 55 of California's electoral votes to the Presidential candidate who wins the statewide vote, this unfair scheme would award votes one-at-a-time, based on the candidate who wins each of the state's Congressional districts. This change could give the Republican presidential candidate in 2008 20 or so of California's 55 electoral votes that are virtually guaranteed to go to the Democratic candidate whoever that may be.

The "Presidential Election Reform Act", as the Republican election thieves are calling their initiative is being pushed by Thomas Hiltachk, a political hack and lawyer in a Sacramento firm that represents the California Republican Party and has worked with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. This initiative is just another example of the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party. They know they can't win in 2008 fair and square so they want to try and stack the deck against the Democratic candidate by reforming how a large Democratic-leaning state allocates its electoral votes while ignoring large Republican-leaning states. The clearly isn't fair to the millions of voters in the other 47 states who will still have their electoral votes cast on a winner-take-call basis. Unless all or a majority of the large states make this kind of reform at the same time we could once again end up with an election being handed to the candidate with fewer popular votes nationwide.

After all, shouldn't the goal of electoral college reform be to move toward a system of one man one vote where the candidate who gets the most votes nationwide is declared the winner? If it is, then this initiative obviously leads us in the wrong direction and makes it even more likely that a popular vote loser could win the Presidency. And, of course, since the Democratic candidate usually wins California, it is only a Democratic presidential candidate who will be placed at a disadvantage.

Come on you Republican hacks out there, you can come up with something better than this. We are going to stomp this initiative here in California just like we are going to stomp your sorry asses in the 2008 congressional and presidential elections. You guys are such losers it's pathetic. I feel sorry for you.

If you want to help stop this crass Republican power grab go to the Fair Election Reform (which seems to be overloaded at the moment) or the Courage Campaign web sites.


Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 4.2/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 4.2/5 (5 votes cast)


Comments (7)

U.P. Man:

So, you think it is a good idea if it happens in a Republican leaning state but not a Democratic leaning state?

Since each state gets to choose how it's electoral votes gets voted, I think it is fair as long as it goes before the voters.

superdestroyer:

Of course, the Democrats overwhelming support for open borders and unlimited Hispanic immigration was about using hordges of illiterate, poor, dependent hispanic voters on the rolls as future Democratic voters. At least the Republicans have nott been willing to destroy the American middle class just to win future elections.

LiberalNitemare:

Nothing like liberals whining about election reform to make your head spin. Whatsa matter? Not enough crackheads out there to handle the normal voter registration and tire slashing duties for the next big election guys?

Im all for some pretty simple election reforms, how about showing ID at the polling place? I can't see how that would hurt things. Why do you libs keep fighting it?

Larkin
The basis of the California argument reaches back to Federalist debates.
In 1800 states selected their delegates to the Electoral College AFTER the election. The Federalists so hated Jefferson that they were ready to hand the country over to Burr via a House of Representatives vote. Jefferson's nemesis, Hamilton, saw what damage might be done to the Republic, and acquiesced.

With that in mind, you humor us with the following paragraph:

"The "Presidential Election Reform Act", as the Republican election thieves are calling their initiative is being pushed by Thomas Hiltachk, a political hack and lawyer in a Sacramento firm that represents the California Republican Party and has worked with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. This initiative is just another example of the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party. They know they can't win in 2008 fair and square so they want to try and stack the deck against the Democratic candidate by reforming how a large Democratic-leaning state allocates its electoral votes while ignoring large Republican-leaning states."

There is significant precedent for this type of action. I guess if you want to call Republicans thieves, hacks, morally bankrupt etc go ahead. There are some monumental names associated with such moves in our history...no, I'm not talking about names like Bois and Gore, but others, such as Hamilton, Adams and Burr.

Trying to gain advantage through legislative initiative...well, call it what you will, but it beats flattening tires of vehicles meant to carry voters to the polls.

The Electoral College violates the civil rights of each and every American in the United States. We are in this together and our votes must be equal for any government to derive its "just powers." The Constitution begins "WE THE PEOPLE," not We the States.

The Electoral College is an unconstitutional feature unconstitutionally inserted into the Constitution. So concluded Lucius Wilmerding of Princeton, the political scientist who coined the term "One voter--One vote" in his work The Electoral College written in 1958. And Andrew Jackson told Congress in 1828 that the Electoral College was never intended to reverse the vote of the American people.

The Electoral College violates the Declaration of Independence in many ways. It does not treat Americans as created equal, it converts their inalienable rights into mere privileges, and violates government with the consent of the governed (the greater truth goes with the greater number" DeTocqueville).

If the Declaration of Independence is binding then the Electoral College is unconstitutional. (1783 a slave named Quok Walker sues his slavemaster in Massachusetts arguing that the words "all men are created equal" made illegal the slavery then existing in that state). The Supreme Court of Massachusetts agrees with the slave and abolished slavery in Massachusetts.

The Declaration of Independence is explicitly recognized the Supreme law of the state of all Post Civil War States. See for example Congressional enabling act and the Constitution of the state of Nevada. http://www.nevadaobserver.com. The State of Nevada, for example, provided, "That the constitution, when formed, shall be republican, and not repugnant to the constitution of the United States, and the principles of the Declaration of Independence." The supremacy of the Declaration of 1776 over the Slave Holder's Constitution of 1787 was inserted into the Constitutions and enabling acts of all states of the Union admitted after the Gettysburg Address.

The Supreme Court of the United States said in 1964 that all votes in the same constituency must have the same weight. The court outlawed the electoral college of the state of Georgia which gave different weight according to county. Every vote must be equal regardless of the place it was cast said the Supreme Court. It is time to implement this ruling.

Yours truly

Gary Michael Coutin, Esquire

Lee Ward:

Mr. Coutin believes that George W. Bush is an illegal president.

Link

Lee Ward:

Alexander Hamilton Defends the Electoral College in Federalist No. 68

March 14, 1788
To the People of the State of New York:

The mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system, of any consequence, which has escaped without severe censure, or which has received the slightest mark of approbation from its opponents.

link


Advertisments

Categories

Archives

Technorati



Add to Technorati Favorites

Credits

Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.