|
|
|||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 3 users and 55 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: OlyBlog is powered by:
Who's new
 |
Submitted by Rob Richards on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 11:53am.
NGUYEN HUY VU Associated Press WriterSPRINGFIELD, Ill. — If John R. Koza gets his way, American voters will never again have to wonder about the workings of the Electoral College and why it decides who sits in the White House. Koza is behind a push to have states circumvent the odd political math of the Electoral College and ensure that the presidency always goes to the winner of the popular vote. Basically, states would promise to award their electoral votes to the candidate with the most support nationwide, regardless of who carries each particular state. "We're just coming along and saying, 'Why not add up the votes of all 50 states and award the electoral votes to the 50-state winner?'" said Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote Inc. "I think that the candidate who gets the most votes should win the office."
|
OlyBlog.net OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you. If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here. Now playing at: 
Latest Classified Ads Upcoming events
 
|
|
|
More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington" OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington. |
|||
For one thing they'll need to change the office title
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 12:25pm.from President of the United States to President of the People. I suppose they'll want to get rid of federal and state Senates next.
EDIT: Of course, I have no idea what their goals are, but they must have the same problem with Senates that they have with the elcetoral college. Same basic reasons for their existance.
Did you read the whole article?
Submitted by Rob Richards on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 12:31pm.What is your opinion about their idea? Their case is that it would prevent a repeat of 2000.
Oh, and I think your assumption about their other views borders on the absurd. Just saying.
Yes, I did read it.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 1:08pm.Hey, Gug
Submitted by Mike on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 2:02pm.do you have any concerns about the small states dominating the election of the POTUS as things currently operate?
Boston Globe ran article in 2004 that included the following from Jimmy Carter:
I think you muddy the waters when you bring in the Senate, our two house system, the question is why are we keeping the electoral college other than it is a waste of time to consider doing away with it because the small states will never relinquish the advantage it give them?
I'll leave you to your pristine waters then.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 2:15pm.Popular vote
Submitted by Mike on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 1:54pm.would be great. It would mean that every vote everywhere would be as important as the next. "Safe" states for either party and the voters therein are slighted as the candidates pull out all the stops for critical votes in swing states. You end up with pandering like ethanol promotion because it makes sense to Iowa farmers (early primary?) as it will increase the price of corn, but it's not good public policy.
Political "machines" (Richard Daley in Chicago, Blackwell in Ohio, K. Harris in Florida, are these the people we want controlling the POTUS (s)election?) would not be able to swing elections so easily.
The electoral college is an anachronism that weakens democracy imo.
Do you think of 2 senators for every state
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 1:59pm.You are absolutely correct
Submitted by wilson on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 4:25pm.No, I don't think 2 senators is anachronistic
Submitted by Mike on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 10:28pm.because the senators are directly chosen by the folks that the senators are supposed to represent. We don't use a state wide election to choose a slate of electors who then get together and choose the senators. I would support substantial changes to the US system, including 15 year terms for supremes, one six year term for president with a referendum on a two year extension, more congresspersons, more senators. There's a guy out there peddling this package through his suggestion of a constitutional convention. Unfortunately, good as I think these changes would be, I agree with Jimmy, we can't even get rid of the most ridiculous anachronism, the electoral college.
How about touch vote screens? That's pretty cool, isn't it? Let's get national id voter cards with our favorite lottery numbers embedded with a flying eagle hologram! That's an improvement, right? How about flashier graphics on election night coverage? Maybe the states in play can flash back and forth from red to blue to give us all a sense of history in the making, how about a halftime show with Karl Rove mudwrestling with James Carville with Matalin as referee, that ought to keep us from thinking too hard about stickier civic issues like states' rights.
I thought that argument got sorted out a long time ago when Pickett's men grabbed their shrouds, mounted up and charged into history, but then a hundred years after Pickett and the gray riders bit the dust, Gingrich resurrected Traveller and charged into battle and engineered a recount that showed the Confederates had actually won the civil war, all they had to do was embrace the visage of Honest Abe and declare the party of Lincoln a venerated southern institution.
Contortionists and anachronisms. Gotta love'em.
What We Have is Fine
Submitted by Jeff Brigham on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 8:05pm.Our current elections system as specified in our Constitution has worked pretty darn well for over 220 years. We have held open elections for President every four years. We held them even during traumatic national events such as our Civil War, World War 2, and the Great Depression.
While there have been questions/conflicts/issues in many of those elections, like in the 2000 election, we settled them in the COURTS. In many other countries, you would have seen tanks in the streets and people being shot with machine-guns. Not here. Here, in our country, we dealt with those questions in our courts.
Our system is solid, dependable, and proven. We need to keep it and be very reluctant to fiddle with it.
Jeff Brigham
I only ask this because it's the obvious question.
Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 02/11/2008 - 1:56am.Yes, I Would!
Submitted by Jeff Brigham on Mon, 02/11/2008 - 8:40am.In 2004, most of us Republicans felt that Gregoire won the Governor's office because of fabricated ballots from King County. Guess what? We had our day in court and it didn't work out. It's over. Gregoire is the Governor. Move on to the next election. Same thing applies to the election of President Bush in 2000 and 2004.
Jeff Brigham