PA GOP Introduces Bill To Rig 2016 Electoral Votes

[UCmeNdc]

On Monday, seven Pennsylvania Republican state representatives introduced a bill to make this vote-rigging scheme a reality in their state. Under their bill, the winner of Pennsylvania as a whole will receive only 2 of the state’s 20 electoral votes, while “[e]ach of the remaining presidential electors shall be elected in the presidential elector’s congressional district.”

Pennsylvania is a blue state that voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every single presidential race for the last two decades, so implementing the GOP election-rigging plan in Pennsylvania would make it much harder for a Democrat to be elected to the White House. Moreover, because of gerrymandering, it is overwhelmingly likely that the Republican candidate will win a majority of Pennsylvania’s electoral votes even if the Democrat wins the state by a very comfortable margin. Despite the fact that President Obama won Pennsylvania by more than 5 points last November, Democrats carried only 5 of the state’s 18 congressional seats. Accordingly, Obama would have likely won only 7 of the state’s 20 electoral votes if the GOP vote rigging plan had been in effect last year.


http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/pa-gop-introduces-bill-steal-2016-electoral

[blue neen]

1. I contacted my local rep today.

He's a Democrat---they need to know where we stand.

There is nothing too low for the Pennsylvania Republicans.

[WI_DEM]

2. Other GOP state legislators are also planning to do this

Can this be challenged in court if it passes?

[BlueDemKev]

4. Not sure.

The Constitution only specifies that states are to cast electoral votes, but it doesn't say HOW they need to be cast. I fear the states have a right to allocate them any way they see fit.

[BlueDemKev]

3. I've been worried about this

Republicans know the only way they can win is turn presidential elections into a congressional district by congressional district election, instead of state by state. As there are more rural districts than urban ones (and will be for awhile thanks to 2010 redistricting).

The Democrats have nowhere to retaliate as the only red state which is fully controlled by Democrats at the state level is West Virginia which only has 5 electoral votes.

We absolutely must defeat these types of proposals in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida. This is just another result of Democratic voters' catastrophic decision of not bothering to vote in 2010. After we stop these bills from being enacted, we ABSOLUTELY must get our ENTIRE base out in 2014 and at least elect Democratic governors to these states to put a stop to any chance of this bull shit from ever being enacted.

EVERY ELECTION, EVERY TIME...VOTE!

[xxxsdesdexxx]

5. What can we do about this?

Is it possible to stop them? This really upsets me and seems like a very corrupt way to elect a president. I'm willing to call and email whoever I need to. I'm willing to put my money -- however limited it might be -- where my mouth is in order to stop this travesty.

[jimmy the one]

6. gets worse, but must be a code, law, or rule

it isn't just Pennsylvania. It's Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, too.

Florida & Virginia arent' guaranteed locks for dems, tho, but even so, might surprise if christie wins repub nom & repubs were to get hoisted on their own petards in florida. virginia - by winning the popular votes there. (I am a staunch dem btw)

More from same site, not for democrats politically squeamish: A little number-crunching demonstrates why. If Republicans in 2011 had abused their monopoly control of state govt in several key swing states and passed new laws for allocating electoral votes, the exact same votes cast in the exact same way in the 2012 election would have converted Barack Obama's advantage of nearly five million popular votes and 126 electoral votes into a resounding Electoral College defeat.
.. The power of elector-allocation rule changes goes further. Taken to an extreme, these Republican-run states have the ability to lock Democrats out of a chance of victory in 2016 absent the Democratic nominee winning a national landslide of some 12 million votes. In short, the Republicans could win the 2016 election in by state law changes made in 2013.
.. These states could actually do it. They all have Republican majorities in their statehouses, and they all have gerrymandered districts. Now that states have begun their legislative calendars, there is absolutely nothing to stop them from taking this kind of action.

a Red Alert Moment. Reince Priebus has blessed the plan. Via The Nation: The RNC chair is encouraging Republican governors and legislators—who, thanks to the “Republican wave” election of 2010, still control many battleground states that backed Obama and the Democrats in 2012—to game the system.
“I think it’s something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue [Democratic in presidential politics] that are fully controlled red [in the statehouse] ought to be considering,” Priebus says with regard to the schemes for distributing electoral votes by district rather than the traditional awarding of the votes of each state (except Nebraska and Maine, which have historically used narrowly defined district plans) to the winner.
... Voter ID will seem like child's play next to this. As it is, it would take a minimum 7% margin for a Democrat to win a House seat in any of these gerrymandered districts. If they are able to change the apportionment of electoral college votes to lock them in now, there really won't be a whole lot of reason to even hold elections in 2016. The coup will have been complete in 2013.
... Republicans operate on the premise that what they can't win outright, they're happy to steal. This is a Red Alert moment for anyone who actually thinks we should have free, fair elections where everyone's vote counts. We need to counter this with a demand to abolish the electoral college altogether, or at the very least, make twice as much noise as the wingers did over health care reform.
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/republicans-quietly-plot-2016-electoral-col - little else to link, tho.

(except Nebraska and Maine, which have historically used narrowly defined district plans)

Nebraska & Maine would be argued as precedent setters, but they are hardly battleground states, nebraska solid red & maine solid blue, & if they ever split it was one vote etc..
There must be some rule, code or law to prevent this type of obvious election tampering, or it'd've been done before, dontcha think? Especially when the outcomes described above could result in such lopsided victories for candidates losing by several percents of the popular state vote.

[Rstrstx]

7. I'd be fine with it IF...

...it was done in every state, and congressional districts were drawn up by truly independent committees (not ones like Arizona's where the governor can meddle). That or the votes are awarded proportionally (so if Obama got 60% of the vote in the state he'd get 60% of the state's electoral votes). But then if you're going to go to that much trouble why not just do a simple popular vote? I doubt any of the above ways would change the outcome of 98% of the elections, it would take a scheme with gerrymandered congressional districts in cherry picked one-party controlled states to do the trick.

Personally I think the idea will go over like a lead balloon if it's only done in Republican-controlled states that voted for Obama. Now if a state like Texas were to back the proposal then it might have some shred of legitimacy, otherwise it just looks like a blatant partisan power grab from a dying party; the public will quickly realize they're being swindled (aside from die-hard Republicans, and even they will know it's just plain old cheating)

[jenmito]

8. The people who live in these states (others are doing this, too) have to protest LOUDLY until the

politicians back down.