Will the GOP rig the electoral college?

[Devils30]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

[opebo]

Yes, they will.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.
2. How would that be unconstitutional?  I'm not in favor of it, but Nebraska and Maine already do this.  If anything, it gets closer to the one person-one vote concept than the current system.

[Devils30]

The problem is the states being talked about (PA, WI) have very very thin GOP majorities. VA was not one of Obama's first 270 electoral votes so that could easily hurt the party there as well.

[opebo]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

Ahh, I didn't realize the GOP had permanent control over reapportionment.  Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[krazen1211]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

Gerrymandering has existed for 200 years.

[Devils30]

 [/quote]

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.
2. How would that be unconstitutional?  I'm not in favor of it, but Nebraska and Maine already do this.  If anything, it gets closer to the one person-one vote concept than the current system.
[/quote]

1. Yes it is, having the GOP candidates get every electoral vote in red leaning swing states but Dems winning a state with 52% like PA and getting 35% of the ev is a blatant rigging of the system. Don't even bullsh** me here.
2. ME and NE dont really have Voting Rights Act issues so it's never been a big deal. Plus, no one has ever brought this issue to the Supreme Court. The constitution lets legislatures allocate electoral votes as they choose but its unclear if this would also be allowed in violation of EP or the Voting Rights Act.
  As for the VRA, packing a lot of minorities into these safe districts makes for reduced influence on the election outcome and very well could violate the retrogression prong of section 2. If Obama wins 92% in an urban philly district its only 1 electoral vote but 50.1% for the GOP in a bunch of suburban districts will net the same thing. Tell me how this is not an EP violation?
   The electoral college isn't the fairest thing in general but there is one key distinction with allocating  EV by state or district. A state has FIXED borders, a district does not.

[Devils30]

Gerrymandering for the House districts is one thing. There is no deeply routed tradition of gerrymandering presidential elections. Plus, in each house district everyone is voting for one office and no one outside the district votes. This scheme would violate EP by having someone's vote for the SAME office count differently.

[MasterJedi]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

Ahh, I didn't realize the GOP had permanent control over reapportionment.  Thanks for clearing that up for me.

If the Dems do it though it's not gerrymandering, it's the will of the people. Didn't you nkow that Inks? Note: I'm not serious with that, I know lots of people don't think that way but it's just what opebo and others on the far left like to think so it's just messing with them.

As for this practice it would be nice to have the EC do this but to get any major support it would make sense to make it so all states change, which would give some EVs to Dems from Republican states. This would seem to help out Republicans more then the Dems though which would be nice to me at least.

[King]

Why don't we just get rid of the electoral college?

Oh right, because neither side benefits more from it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

1. Yes it is, having the GOP candidates get every electoral vote in red leaning swing states but Dems winning a state with 52% like PA and getting 35% of the ev is a blatant rigging of the system. Don't even bullsh** me here.

So states that lean blue could do the same thing.  There's nothing legally stopping them from doing it.  Unless you're going to say that right now, what NE and ME are doing is unconstitutional, then neither is this.

[politicallefty]

It wouldn't be a horrible idea if districts were drawn by a nonpartisan commission (ideally with an expanded House).

However, doing this in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania is nothing but a shameless attempt at a power-grab. I'd have to wonder how much individual Congressmen would support this. This could easily nationalize races that may not otherwise have been, like those in the Philly suburbs. I can't imagine Meehan or Fitzpatrick would have wanted the Obama ground game in their districts.

[justfollowingtheelections]

These are all games that have nothing to do with democracy.  Just get rid of the electoral college and let the majority of the popular vote determine the winner (and if no one wins the majority have a run-off election with the top two candidates).

[opebo]

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

Ahh, I didn't realize the GOP had permanent control over reapportionment.  Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Gerrymandering has existed for 200 years.

Guys neither its longevity as a practice or the possibility of it being committed by the other side makes it any the less an attempt to 'rig' the system.  By 'rig' I mean, obviously, an attempt to subvert the wishes of the electorate - just as the current house of representatives represents a subversion of the wishes of the electorate.

However you do have a reasonable point that the American political system itself is entirely a rigged system - the intent of its design being to control and oppress rather than to represent or empower.

[memphis]

There is not right to one man/one vote in the EC. To the contrary, it was set up on pupose, not to be proportional. We would need a constitutional amendment to make it proprtional.

[Brittain33]

Color me disappointed that some of our Republican friends think this is awesome.

Guys: NE and ME don't matter because they are small, homogeneous states where it makes no difference for the outcome. Introducing this ONLY in states with narrow Dem majorities for president, but Republican legislatures, rigs the system. If you want to do this, do it nationwide, so the votes of Dems in Texas and Mississippi count, too. But since that will never happen, this takes our system even further away from Democracy. And for damn sure an election in PA where Obama wins a solid majority of the voter but a minority of the EV because he lost most districts violates one man, one vote.

[Brittain33]

1. Yes it is, having the GOP candidates get every electoral vote in red leaning swing states but Dems winning a state with 52% like PA and getting 35% of the ev is a blatant rigging of the system. Don't even bullsh** me here.

So states that lean blue could do the same thing.  There's nothing legally stopping them from doing it.  Unless you're going to say that right now, what NE and ME are doing is unconstitutional, then neither is this.

Inks, are you being disingenuous? Surely you know the only reasons Republicans are pursuing this is because they have a legislative lock on several large states that habitually vote Dem for President, a lock they ensure with their own maps. There is no counterpart in blue-voting states and no prospect of one.

[wan]

Of course not!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/15/the-gops-big-electoral-vote-gambit-explained/

It's very disturbing and I think a violation of Equal Protection/one person one vote. That being said this could just be a trial balloon being floated and no editorials or anyone sane will endorse this. I know legislatures did this before 1820 but that was well before the 14th amendment was enacted.

1. It's not "rigging" the electoral college.

Well, yes it is rigging - just as the House is now a rigged institution: gerrymandering is rigging.

Gerrymandering has existed for 200 years.

Which of course makes it fair.

[Beet]

The Senate is already stacked against us. The House is already stacked against us. Now they want to stack the last federal office against us.

[greenforest32]

These are all games that have nothing to do with democracy.  Just get rid of the electoral college and let the majority of the popular vote determine the winner (and if no one wins the majority have a run-off election with the top two candidates).

However you do have a reasonable point that the American political system itself is entirely a rigged system - the intent of its design being to control and oppress rather than to represent or empower.

^^^

Plus this increases the incentive for gerrymandering. I guess we should retroactively award the Presidency to Romney considering he is the winner under this superior and more fair method.

[Sopranos Republican]

Why don't we just get rid of the electoral college?

Oh right, because neither side benefits more from it.

Exactly why they will never do it.

[Devils30]

The GOP plan could backfire down the road in those midwestern states. With someone like Christie it's not difficult to see him run strong in PA, MI, WI while struggling to gain in VA as the state has seen growth from the types who are base Democrats.
It's possible in 12 years that VA, NC lean D while WI, PA move right toward the national average. It really only takes a small PVI shift to do so.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

1. Yes it is, having the GOP candidates get every electoral vote in red leaning swing states but Dems winning a state with 52% like PA and getting 35% of the ev is a blatant rigging of the system. Don't even bullsh** me here.

So states that lean blue could do the same thing.  There's nothing legally stopping them from doing it.  Unless you're going to say that right now, what NE and ME are doing is unconstitutional, then neither is this.

Inks, are you being disingenuous? Surely you know the only reasons Republicans are pursuing this is because they have a legislative lock on several large states that habitually vote Dem for President, a lock they ensure with their own maps. There is no counterpart in blue-voting states and no prospect of one.

OK, but just because the Democrats won't do the same doesn't make in unconstitutional.... that's my point.