Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 01:40 PM Mar 2015

New Push to Split Michigan’s Electoral Votes



“A Republican presidential candidate hasn’t won Michigan since 1988, but with 2016 on the horizon, GOP lawmakers are proposing bills that could help a second-place finisher win some electoral college votes here,” MLive reports.

David Weigel: “Had this system been in place in 2012, Mitt Romney would have lost Michigan by nearly 450,000 of 4.7 million votes, but walked away with nine of the state’s 16 electoral votes.”

First Read: “As we said when states like Pennsylvania were considering similar changes in 2011, if you’re looking to change the rules of the game, you’re admitting your party can’t win under the current rules. “

###

http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=103129692&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4911601
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
1. So sick of our party complaining but doing nothing
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 01:44 PM
Mar 2015

Where are the changes to Mississippi, Utah or heck even Kuntucky or West Virginia. Fighting back really is the only way to win.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
5. IMO gerrymandering would depend upon assigning votes according to congressional districts
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 03:03 PM
Mar 2015

I am not sure that is really what is proposed in Michigan, which, I believe seeks to divide its electoral votes according to the didtribution of votes overall. Both parties at different times have made this argument when it fits their advantage. And both parties at different times have rejected this argument when it was to their disadvantage.

The Electoral College is a system of indirect voting. Indirect voting was a solution to various technical and political problems in the first 50-75 years of the nation.

The electoral college with votes not subdivided tends to accentuate differences that exist in the popular vote. In this way, the electoral college usually works against ties. The electoral college with votes apportioned on overall distribution of popular vote tends to follow popular vote. An electoral college that apportioned votes according to votes in congressional districts would be subject to gerrymandering.






 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
6. It sure is
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 03:44 PM
Mar 2015
Rigging? State Rep. Cindy Gamrat, R-Plainwell, this month reintroduced legislation that would award Michigan's electoral college votes by Congressional District, ditching the winner-take-all model that most states use and diminishing the influence of large cities that can swing a vote.

David Weigel of Bloomberg News, calling the bill part of the "electoral college-rigging movement," noted that Republican nominee Mitt Romney would have won nine of Michigan's 16 electoral college votes in 2012 under the proposed system despite losing to Democratic President Barack Obama by nearly 450,000 votes.

BumRushDaShow

(129,096 posts)
4. With PA's new Dem governor
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 03:00 PM
Mar 2015

a repeat of 2011 will be so far off the table that it will be under the floor and down in the basement near a drain hole.

Takket

(21,577 posts)
7. Absolutely NOT
Mon Mar 16, 2015, 03:51 PM
Mar 2015

I am a MI resident and thanks for this heads up because I will be calling/writing ever state/national rep I have to make sure this doesn't happen. Either we put up with the silly electoral college or we elect the pres by popular vote but gerrymandering the vote will disenfranchise the state because of how the districts are gerrymandered.

mvymvy

(309 posts)
8. 73% of Michigan Voters Support a National Popular Vote
Tue Mar 17, 2015, 04:01 PM
Mar 2015

A survey of Michigan voters showed 73% overall support for a national popular vote for President.

Support was 73% among independents, 78% among Democrats, and 68% among Republicans.

By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 67% among 30-45 year olds, 74% among 46-65 year olds, and 75% for those older than 65.

By gender, support was 86% among women and 59% among men.

On December 11, 2008, The Michigan House of Representatives passed the National Popular Vote bill by a bipartisan 65-36 margin

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes, and thus the presidency, to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by replacing state winner-take-all laws for awarding electoral votes in the enacting states.

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 80% of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.

The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of Electoral College votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). The candidate receiving the most popular votes from all 50 states (and DC) would get all the 270+ electoral votes of the enacting states.

The presidential election system, using the 48 state winner-take-all method or district winner method of awarding electoral votes, that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founders. It is the product of decades of change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.

The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founders in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. States can, and have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Historically, major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed recently.
In the 39 states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-83% range or higher. - in recent or past closely divided battleground states, in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.
Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 33 state legislative chambers in 22 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 250 electoral votes, including one house in Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Nevada (6), New Mexico (5), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Colorado (9). The bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.

NationalPopularVote.com

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»New Push to Split Michiga...