Field poll: Californians support GOP "electoral vote reform"

[AlGore-08.com]

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6677105

SACRAMENTO - More voters like the idea of divvying up Electoral College votes by congressional districts than not, according to a Field Poll released today, but the issue is sure to become divided along partisan lines as big-money campaigns explain the national political implications.

In the first survey on the issue since the Presidential Election Reform Act initiative was filed two weeks ago for the June 3 ballot, 49 percent said they'd support changing the current winner-take-all system to a district-by-district method, while 42 percent are opposed.

And that's after voters are told that scrapping the current winner-take-all system would give Republicans an advantage in the presidential race, with a potential 22 of California's 55 electoral votes going to the Republican nominee. The GOP currently holds 19 congressional districts, but President Bush defeated Democratic nominee John Kerry in 22 congressional districts in 2004. All electoral votes went to Kerry, who won the state 55 percent to 44 percent.

"It's a fairness issue that cuts across party lines," said Kevin Eckery, spokesman for Californians for Equal Representation, a committee for the initiative, filed by Tom Hiltachk, a lawyer in a Sacramento firm that represents the California Republican Party and has worked with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. "There's a substantial core of support among Democrats and independents. We're trying to create a situation where the wishes of voters are better reflected. That's only good."

In the poll, voters were first asked if they supported dividing electoral votes by Congressional district. That was supported 47% to 35% - - 57% of Republicans supported it and 41% of Democrats supported it. Even after being told that this plan would benefit the Republican party, 41% of Democrats said they supported it.

Again: 41% of California Democrats support dividing up California's electoral votes by district - - even after they're told that doing so would help the Republicans win the White House.

F.Y.I. This measure is on the June 2008 ballot - - the Presidential primary is in February. The June election is the Congressional primary, which means that it will be that much harder to get most voters aware of the initiative and into the polls.

[SaveElmer]

1. If it passes...Republicans hold the White House...simple as that...

And unless the whole country follows suit, will give Republicans a virtual lock on it for years...

[rfranklin]

2. What fucking idiots! But of course they voted for Ah-nuld...

I think it would be fair for CA to be annexed by Mexico--after all, we did steal it from them.

[slackmaster]

15. How about putting your home state in your profile so I can bash it in kind?

I'm sure I'd be able to think of something mean-spirited and thoughtless to say about it.

:argh:

[rockymountaindem]

3. So basically we're screwed?

I can't believe people would fall for this.

[Teaser]

4. It will be defeated.

That's the problem, we'll have to spend money defeating it, money better spent elsewhere. But it will go down.

[Tom Joad]

7. oth once it comes out as a Republican scheme, it will make them look even worse.

and bad publicity for Repukers of California is always good news.

[RubyDuby in GA]

5. So explain to me again why it's ok to make fun of the south for being stupid, when it's clearly CA

leading the way?

Well, if they do it in California, it should be done across the country. GA only has 15 electoral votes, but 7 out of them would be Dem votes, not all Republican. If it's done in one state, it needs to be done in them all.

It would help the Republicans in CA, but they would lose the Solid South facade.

Fuckers.

[Tom Joad]

9. if they did away with the electoral college completely, that would be a good thing.

I think these poll results are just showing that electoral college ain't popular, but when informed of more detail about this initiative, and the unfairness of it, i think it will be easily defeated.

[Tom Joad]

6. I think it will lose 2-1, or at least by a substantial margin. bookmark this.

It is not difficult to change a people's favorable view of an idea to an unfavorable one, and this can be done easily with this initiative.

I am going out on the limb just a little bit, but i think my prediction will come true, this initiative will fail.

By the way, it is NOT on the ballot yet. It probably will be, but it is not certain.

[AlGore-08.com]

13. Ballot initiatives are never easy - - they're always very expensive

Very, very, very expensive. That's often their first or second point - - tie up the opposition's funding fighting something instead of someone.

I am not convinced it can be easily defeated - - especially after living through the bogus "recall" election of Gray Davis that got Ahnold in the executive mansion to begin with.

[Mz Pip]

8. If Florida

had this system in place in 2000... Well, that's another story.

This is a GOP power grab, plain and simple. Is the GOP proposing similar legilation in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Oklahoma? I seriously doubt it. That is what will have to be driven home if this insanity makes it to a vote.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[bluestateguy]

10. It's not on the ballot yet

I expect that Deborah Bowen will scrutinize very last signature down to each dotted i and crossed t and it up in knots and litigation to stall unitl after the November election.

[krispos42]

11. They aren't asking the right question... It's a good idea... if ALL states do it

Until then, it's partisan and biased.

I have an idea... let's have FLORIDA do it first, just to, you know, see how it goes. Or Texas. Just to experiment a little.



Actually, I'm not even a fan of doing it by district. I think that the electoral votes should be allocated statewide percentages won. If candidate A won 60% of the statewide vote, he should get about 60% of the electoral votes. This gives third-party candidates a shot at winning some electoral votes. If the Greens, for example, got 10% of the vote in California, they'd get like 5 or 6 electoral votes, depending on how many votes were needed to get one electoral vote.

This, and instant runoff voting for the other offices would really give third parties a chance.

[DemKR]

12. Democrats

Democrats have proposed an initiative that, if passed, takes precedence over the Electoral College one, and calls for national popular vote. If this is on the ballot and passed, whatever the results are of the Republican initiative are null and void. The strategy is: Real election reform = eliminating the electoral college.

This is definitely another right wing scheme cooked up to rig an election, but we will definitely need to spend some money here. Fucking crooks

[Mz Pip]

14. The SF Chronicle came out against it

and the LTTEs had a bunch of the usual partisan BS. So I sent a LTTE to call them on the BS.

I don't see similar initiatives being advanced in Texas, Mississippi or Alabama. If the Republicans were so concerned about electoral fairness they would be advancing this issue in more states than just big BLUE California. Bastards.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[RevolutionStartsNow]

16. Californians: This is an important fight.

Get involved. I will.

[Hawaii Hiker]

17. Sure, they want reform, problem is which is the best way to go about it

I'm sure if people were asked, "Would you like to see your taxes reduced by 35%"?, I'm sure they'd want that to....Problem is, how do you go about it...

Election reform makes sense if done across the country - not just California...I think splitting electoral votes based on % of the victors margin is probably the fairest way...NOT awarding by each district, because in that way, some small Republican county with a population of 250 is worth the same as some big city with 2,500,000 people.....

But this CA. proposal stinks to high heaven, it's not reforming, it's election riggging...