A Bit About Amendment 36

The Rocky Mountain News has some discussion, but let me expound on this a bit.

Amendment 36 is possibly the most damaging bill ever to come down the pike in Colorado. Bigger than Amendment 2, and we all know how big THAT was.

What Amendment 36 would do is to divide the electoral college votes along popular voting results. Thus if Kerry edges Bush or visa versa, one would get 5 electoral votes, the other 4. This would be disasterous.

We all know, or SHOULD know why we have an electoral college. It is there so states with high populations don't make the rules for the rest of us. It gives all states a say in a national election. If we were to change this in Colorado, it would make Colorado IMMEDIATELY irrelevant in National politics. Both parties would ignore Colorado. Why? Because Colorado tends to be a pretty even state, with no candidate getting more than, at most, sixty percent of the vote, and I'm not sure that's even happened. So if Amendment 36 is passed, realistically it turns Colorado into a one electoral vote state. Not worth it to any side. Why stump in a one vote state when you can stump in a state with more returns. Colorado becomes persona non grata in National Politics.

Some people say that it should be this way for every state. That's o.k. if you want the New Yorks, Texases, and Californias of the world determining what goes on here in Colorado. I don't. I like Coloradoans running Colorado. I like the fact that ALL states have influence, not just the ones with huge population centers. Getting rid of the electoral college would make 40 states superfluous. Not a good idea, in my opinion.

Would Amendment 36 help Kerry or Bush this year? It might, but it's like chopping off a leg to help cure a cut. The cure is worse than the problem.

I enjoy the fact that Kerry, Edwards, Bush and Cheney have all come to Colorado, and I want that to continue. I like the fact that Colorado has the opportunity to sway an election by giving nine votes to one or the other.

Amendment 36 would destroy that. It would destroy Colorado politics.

Please, please, please vote against Amendment 36.

P.S. This is a non-partisan issue.

Comments

[Delta Oscar]

You really are a dumb shit. Proportional allocation of the electoral college is the best idea ever. Winner-take-all is cheating people out of their vote.

In the late 1700's, the electoral college was a compromise between congressional election and popular election. Most of the delegates in Philadelphia opposed congressional election. Virginia’s George Mason thought that to refer the choice of president to the people would be to “refer a trial of colors to a blind man.”

Corncerning the amount of political attention Colorado receives, it would remain unchanged. The number of votes a state provides will always be the constant for determining the state's political value.

[Blake]

I think the candidates would campain here more than before because they could get 4 votes even if they lost the state. I agree that the state is pretty evenly divided so why should we disregard 49% of the people? In the election of 2000, I didn't have any reason to vote at all. I knew the state would go for Bush. This time it's much closer but it's usually not.

[Madelaine]

The fact that the west holds so few people is a damn fine reason to get rid of the electoral college in the first place. Why should land get a vote?

We should also do away with the Senate. I believe in representation based on population.

[Shane]

This is a fanatical idea. As one of the previous posters noted, it is funded by a multi-millionaire out of California, and a democrat to boot. Why on earth would he be interested in Colorado? Because he can steal some of the electoral college votes here in a state that often goes republican. Note that he isn't pushing for the same change in California where he is from because it would swing the election in favor of the republicans. His agenda is to pursue this in predominantly republican states only. His organization was also registering people to vote and he was paying people who registered others only for democrats, although they could register people of any party. As a result, they went to predominatly democratic area's to sign people up to vote. This is a sham and I for one don't want some millionaire from California messing around in Colorado politics!!!

[Jennifer]

I am impressed with everyones views on this topic. I unfortunatly have to disagree. I believe that this is a great amendment. I believe that it encourages people to vote, because, your one vote would count.

I think it important to recall why we have the electoral college. Back in the begining of this fine nation, we lacked the communication abilities we have now. With the innovation of the internet, and the millions of other great technologies that we have, there too should be an evolution in our voting process.

So, again, I believe that this is a fine idea, and it encourages the younger crowd who feels their voice dampered by our current voting process to get out there.

[Jennifer]

I am impressed with everyones views on this topic. I unfortunatly have to disagree. I believe that this is a great amendment. I believe that it encourages people to vote, because, your one vote would count.

I think it important to recall why we have the electoral college. Back in the begining of this fine nation, we lacked the communication abilities we have now. With the innovation of the internet, and the millions of other great technologies that we have, there too should be an evolution in our voting process.

So, again, I believe that this is a fine idea, and it encourages the younger crowd who feels their voice dampered by our current voting process to get out there.

[Jennifer]

I am impressed with everyones views on this topic. I unfortunatly have to disagree. I believe that this is a great amendment. I believe that it encourages people to vote, because, your one vote would count.

I think it important to recall why we have the electoral college. Back in the begining of this fine nation, we lacked the communication abilities we have now. With the innovation of the internet, and the millions of other great technologies that we have, there too should be an evolution in our voting process.

So, again, I believe that this is a fine idea, and it encourages the younger crowd who feels their voice dampered by our current voting process to get out there.

[GrumpyBunny]

I normally will sign petitions to get things on the ballot - let the voters decide. I refused this one when asked weeks ago. The guy chased after me thinking I didn't understand.

I told him I understood. He was a lefty and wanted those votes to count for more. Denver may end up with Dems for senators, but Colorado tends to vote Republican as whole.

He knew I had him.

But now I wonder? Will voters be smart and vote this down?

[Mark Reardon]

The funding comes out of California. Obviously this is a good idea for us rubes in the sticks. Break california out by demographics and Bush would have been so far ahead in the electoral college that Florida would not have mattered.

Darren,

To get across to folks how important it is to keep control of our own affairs, you might use a little exercise I use with old buddies from Jersey to show that htey have no concept of life in the west. " New York City has 8 million people (200 Census, about 8.2M) Jersey has 8 million people (200 census, about 8.4M). You know how out of touch New Yorkers are to your daily concerns." Then the zinger - "Look at the map, Start next to Canada in Montana. Go south through Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico. Stop at the Mexican border and you have 7.5 million people."

[mlrmpem]

so who exactly proposed this, would they be the same people that think that everyone should get a ribbon at field day?

for those... *smack*smack* competition is life, you can't work or support yourself as an adult if you don't learn to compete... and elections are competitions duh