Colorado weighs proportional electoral votes

[Nambe]

DENVER (AP)

A plan to scrap the winner-take-all system of allocating electoral votes in Colorado is heading to the ballot in November.

If passed, Amendment 36 would make Colorado the first state to allocate electoral votes proportionately according to the popular vote, rather than giving a winner all of the state's electoral votes.

Secretary of State Donetta Davidson said Friday that supporters have gathered enough signatures to put the measure on the November ballot.

If the proposal had been in place four years ago, Democrat Al Gore would have earned enough electoral votes to go to the White House. ..

State Sen. Ron Tupa, D-Boulder, tried unsuccessfully in 2001 to change Colorado's electoral system. He said the new ballot initiative is a good idea.

"It will give voters the unique opportunity to reform an outdated electoral system that disenfranchises hundreds of thousands of Colorado voters," he said.

Ride Don’t Drive * * It’s Global Cool

[phillybri]

1. Would this take effect for this election?

:shrug:

[Nambe]

2. The article says they want it to take effect immediatly.

But, it will be challenged, for sure. Repugs will fight this to their dying day, for good reason. A government of the people, that is un-republican.

[olddem43]

3. If it passes, it would be in effect for this election but

I can't believe a state that would likely vote for Bushco would vote for it at the same time.

[Hawkeye-X]

6. Actually

a quite large number of the population in Colorado are Democratic.

The rural areas are often Republican.

Denver, Pueblo, and the Western Slope have the high number of Democrats/independent swing voters.

Bush can safely win Colorado Springs area (Freeperville)

Hawkeye-X

[paulk]

4. this is being cast as a partisan issue

and while it may be locally, I don't think it's wise to see it that way. What if this initiative was on the ballot in California or New York? Then the dynamic would be reversed, with Republicans for it and Democrats against.

This sets a bad precedent, IMHO. The electoral college needs to be thrown out, but doing it one state at a time is a recipe for disaster.

What if 40 states went this way? That would give the other 10 states a huge incentive to block attempts at change. Those 10 states would, in effect, hold the power to elect the president. All campaigning would be directed at "winner take all" states, and none in proportional states.

The Electoral College needs to be resolved at a national level.

[rkc3]

5. I think you're right. It will happen only if Georgie gets to name two new

justices to the Supreme Court. Then we'll have a fair and balanced system to elect our president.

[LauraK]

13. All commonwealth countries have proportional voting.

I don't think the Green party or an third party will ever get a foot in the door without it.

[paulk]

14. no green or third party will ever get it's foot in the door

until we go with a Parliamentary system.

Which is what commonwealth countries already have?

[JusticeForAll]

7. Partisan issue - take it up at the national level?

Thank god we don't give the same response to whether gay marriages should be legal!

Hooray for the states that have approved these long deserved rights (in both voting and gay marriages). With more and more states dealing with these apparently complex issues, we may finally get to an equitable national decision.

[paulk]

15. what do the electoral college and gay marriage have to do

with each other? To compare the two in the context of this thread makes no sense.

[Judi Lynn]

8. What a great idea! It has been avoided everywhere else, except 2 states

mentioned in the article:

Only two other states do not have winner-take-all systems of casting electoral college votes. Nebraska and Maine give two votes to the winner of each state, and remaining votes are cast to show who won each congressional district.
(snip)

We're in desperate need for an overhaul, just as Ron Tupa said, above.

[Democat]

9. Bad idea - What if CA/NY do it, but TX/FL don't? The system would break!

This should not be done at the state level, only at the national level.

Otherwise, it's a recipe for breaking the system more than it already is.

One party or the other could be completely shut out of the presidential election forever if certain states had this and others didn't.

[JusticeForAll]

10. The system would evolve as it is evolving now

n/t

[Ratty]

11. I can't believe the Republicans would let this happen

Right now Colorado's 17 electoral votes would likely all go to Bush.

[canuckybee]

12. Colorado only has 9 EVs does it not?

[Endangered Specie]

16. This could get quite interesting.

I suspect the SP will kill it.