Congressional Redistricting And The Electoral College
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-01-28/congressional-redistricting-and-electoral-college
Virginia Governor Bob Mcdonnell has come out against a state senate proposal on the Electoral College. It would have shifted Virginia from a winner take all system to one with votes based on congressional district results. However, another Virginia GOP plan, one to redraw the state’s congressional districts lines is still on the table. It's move that would shore up their party’s strength in the state. Changing district lines to favor the party in power is not a new idea, but in recent years it’s been, for the most part, a Republican tactic. Please join us to talk about what new election rules may mean for election results and our government.
Guests
Rob Richie
executive director, FairVote
Amy Walter
national editor, Cook Political Report
John Farrell
contributing editor, National Journal and author of "Clarence Darrow: Attorney for the Damned" (2011)
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Come On Diane! are you only capable of hard left partisan politics? Your bias is transparent daily.
Democrats' revenge in 2012: a radical Illinois gerrymander
Illinois' redistricting plan is poised to turn half a dozen Republican seats Democratic and could help Democrats retake the House in 2012.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0608/Democrats-revenge-...
Welcome to America’s Most Gerrymandered District
Though both parties carve up states in partisan self-interest, the Democrats dominating Maryland’s assembly are particularly aggressive -- and creative -- when it comes to the electoral map. In 2002, they shifted thousands of black voters from Al Wynn’s majority-minority District 4 into District 8, just to oust longtime Republican Representative Connie Morella. In 2012, they knocked out 86-year old incumbent Roscoe Bartlett by chopping his district in half and gluing it to a wealthy Democratic suburb near D.C. Bartlett lost by 20 points. Democrats now control seven of eight House seats.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/109938/welcome-americas-most-gerrymandered...
Parma,my home town right outside of Cleveland was gerrymandered by the T-Party/Republicans for 2012. It was split in two,part of which is in Lorain and Medina,Ohio. The other half is now part of Toledo Ohio,and the Lake Erie Islands. NONE of Parma is in the Cleveland Ohio district. It`s like we turned back the clock to 1775. A government without representation. This dirty trickstery forced the people in a 50/50 State,to be without a voice. Our courts are seeded with right wing ideologues totally devoted to the mission of the Oligarchs. PEOPLE vs CORPORATIONS in court cases always go against the PEOPLE,both in Ohio and the SCOTUS. Until that is reversed,Democracy will continue to struggle.
How can I convey just how much more small government costs the people.Both in higher taxes on workers,and on higher prices anywhere government had the power to control them.THIS MUCK SUCKS BIG TIME..
liberal bias
Seven D.R. shows on Hurricane Katrina in the two months following landfall, and much time slamming republicans and the federal response.
Aug. 30/05
Sept. 7/05
Sept. 8/05
Sept 12/05
Sept 13/05
Oct 5/05
Oct. 31/05
Two D.R. shows on Hurricane Sandy, with much time praising Obama and the federal response right before the election, and zero shows afterwords. Last I heard despite the media blackout, their still having quite a bit of trouble over there.
Oct 31/12
Nov. 2/12
Sam T. we have a different opinion of media bias. In Ohio our former Gov.Bob Taft gave tax breaks to the wealthy and corporation. He gave the rest of us the largest tax increase in our history. This resulted in an $8 billion deficit and debt.Along with the loss of 500,000 jobs.No media coverage. NOTHING AT ALL. My local NPR station is dedicated to the right wing agenda.I expect them to say,'this is a paid political message,and does not reflect etc etc'.
I must endure 100 Diane Rehm shows dedicated to the plight of millionaires and billionaires,for every 1 show on poverty in the United States. When we finally get that 1 show,a NeoNut will surely call to remind us that we are too good to the poor and hungry.
There were failings during Hurricane Sandy.However they were not the government`s.They were private power companies. Companies like ours here who left customers powerless for over a week. Never said sorry,but announced more lay offs in an industry surviving with skeleton crews already. Companies who share line crews and must move them from other States in times of emergency. I heard 1 trucker call in to a talk show.His convoy had a million ready to eat meals on board. On time. No waiting for "Brownie". It`s nobody`s fault but T-Party/Republicans who hate FEMA with a passion. Each T-P/Rep president has broken FEMA.
Sorry you`ve forgotten Katrina was multiple failures. Before the storm,the U.S.Army Corp of Engineers said the levees must be replaced.Budget cuts not only stopped the rebuilding of the levees,also all the practice evacuations were cancelled. A perfect storm ,utter stupidity,and total mis-management.
Basing voting district borders on a region's land area rather than its population size is not only unethical, it defies logic ... unless your motivation is to rewrite the rules of American democracy to give your party an unfair advantage.
Using aforementioned gerrymandered districts to determine Electoral Vote allocation in a presidential election is an affront to the fundamental tenets upon which our Great American Experiment is based.
Enter the modern Republican Party, a shining beacon of Machiavellian methodology.
clifffromparma wrote: "bias"
All I'm asking for is fair coverage of all issues. To start off the topic about gerrymandering with " Virginia Republicans ", what more needs to be said about bias. Gerrymandering by all political parties has been going on for a couple hundred years, now all of a sudden it's a republican problem! When a state changes political parties, the party in control redraws the district lines. If it was a democrat party state before, it was drawn to favor democrats and vise versa. That's just the way it works. What we are seeing are poor losers in previously democrat states not accepting the results of elections. They were not complaining when they had the power and were drawing lines to favor democrats.
The same thing is going on where I live in WI., we have been in constant capaign mode for four years because democrats will not accept the results of state elections, it has cost the tax payers tens of millions because one party cannot and will not wait for the next election.
clifffromparma wrote:"There were failings during Hurricane Sandy.However they were not the government`s. "
How can you know that without the daily media pounding like Katrina received for months afterwords? Except for Fox, Sandy has been forgotten about.
Katrina or Sandy? Late warnings, confused and inadequate responses, FEMA foul-ups and suffering refugees.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/11/12/sandy-hurricane-superst...
Multiple failures by Mayor Ray Nagin and Gov. Kathleen Blanco resulted in 1833 dead.
NEW ORLEANS -- Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin was indicted Friday on charges that he used his office for personal gain, accepting payoffs, free trips and gratuities from contractors while the city was struggling to recover from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/18/16587058-former-new-orleans-m...
NBC's Lisa Myers Reports on Governor Blanco's Katrina Mistakes
Myers also relayed that when Blanco and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation 20 hours before Katrina hit, they were ignoring the advice of experts who had warned it would take 48 hours. Additionally, Blanco was slow to get National Guard troops to restore order. A complete transcript of the story follows:
YES,Democrats did gerrymandering during their tenure. I can recall a Cleveland neighborhood being moved from the Conservative district into the Cleveland district. It`s been a challenge in cities like Euclid Ohio. Tons of lawsuits occurred here too. This is within the city limits of one city. There was the Democratic attempt to include all residents,rather than isolating all the African Americans. Sure it`s been done,the attempt was inclusion,not exclusion. But nothing at all like putting Parma Ohio,a Northeast Ohio city into Toledo,a northwestern Ohio town.
When you must take a train or plane to go to your Congressman`s local home office,YOU HAVE BEEN SCREWED,,,Taxation without representation....
ANONYMOUS an internet watchdog group caught Karl Rove and his T-Party allies trying to fix Ohio`s 2012 election. It was reported that a Mitt Romney owned group tried to install election software that was created by Romney.Completely untested. It`s the reason some speculate Karl Rove was so sure of Ohio`s election outcome on Fox News. We have the Diebold e-mails,of their CEO that guaranteed to the Republicans,they`ll get the outcome they desire,that a couple years ago.It was so repugnant,the company had to change it`s name. Sadly,Diebold still is on thr government teat,and gets many mqany taxpayer dollars.We have voter intimidation,and disqualification. We have a out of control lunatic Republican Governor in Florida,who might as well bring out the Brown Shirts & Black Shirts to keep Florida residents from voting...
Maybe 1 or 2 of these crimes could be mis-understood. But in reality we have the NeoNuts realizing nobody wants Fascism.It`s unpopular to a free people.So rather than allowing the Democratic process to play out,it`s dirty tricks.
Another trick was the Gonzalez Justice Dept,prosecutors scandal. They set up stings around the U.S. to bust local democrats,and flood the airwaves with propaganda. These happened in 2010,the T-Party year,where many voters stayed who home.The 2010 T-Party success year was because of voter apathy,not voter approval. These were key areas like,Ohio,New Jersey,Michigan,Illinois,and Louisiana.
Every new day brings a new Republican dirty trick.It seems Gov Walker is taking up the vote fixing as well.
I wonder why we can't change the system from congressional districts to a slate of Representatives elected by the whole state (kinda like a parlimentary election). This would prevent not only more radical progessives and conservatives from being the only options (due to the primary system, if an entire slate of people was put forward it would make it easier to include moderates, I believe) but also ensure that redriscting can't have any kind of impact.
also do away with the EC already. how can something devised 225 years ago still be used today without any major revisions. its just silly.
@ Sam T
Gerrymandering is one thing, both Parties while in power use this political tool to their advantage.
However, what Virginia and other States in Republican control are thinking of doing, gerrymandering by creating solid Republican districts and then change the Electoral College so that if a Presidential candidate wins the more districts they get more electoral college votes, that my friend is CHEATING or in simple terms DISFRANCHISEMENT of voters. They are basically saying, Republican votes counts more than Democratic votes.
The Republican vote, based on analysis available to all, is more spread out, a cluster of GOP vote, thereby creating more districts, whereas, the Democratic vote is more localize, creating less districts. More GOP districts, more Electoral College votes, less districts, less Electoral College votes.
With a huge shift in demographics currently under way, more Democratic voters live in cities, the Republicans know if they are to have a fighting chance in 2016 they need to deploy different tactics. Lets not forget, in the House Election of 2012, more votes were cast for the Democratic Representatives, than GOP. Pretty glaring and scary numbers if you are a GOP candidate. Numbers don't lie.
see more articles:
http://www.wire-news.com/republicans-in-virginia-other-states-seeking-el...
http://www.wire-news.com/electoral-college-changes-would-pose-danger-for...
http://www.wire-news.com/republicans-split-over-electoral-college-change...
Richard Dennis:" that my friend is CHEATING or in simple terms DISFRANCHISEMENT of voters"
No it's not. The purpose of the electoral college was to instill fairness in the system of electing a president. It was to give a voice to those in rural communities in presidential elections. It was precisely created to put a check on large cities from monopolizing national elections. Some states Maine and Nebraska are not winner take all, changes to the winner take all states would indeed serve the purpose of the electoral college, it's not cheating, it's about not allowing the majority to trample the rights of the minority. The electoral college system obviously and intentionally opened the door for the possibility that presidents can and SHOULD sometimes be elected by the minority. Changes in the electoral college as proposed by some republicans is in keeping with intent of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and they would stand up as perfectly legal in court.
We are a Republic, not a democracy.
A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good).
Lawmaking is a slow, deliberate process in our Constitutional Republic requiring approval from the House, Senate, Executive (President or Governor), The Supreme Court, and individual jurors (jury-nullification). Lawmaking in our unlawful democracy occurs rapidly requiring approval from the whim of the majority as determined by polls and/or voter referendums. Voter referendums allow legislators to blame bad law on the people. A good example of democracy in action is a lynch mob.
Democracies always self-destruct when the non-productive majority realizes that it can vote itself handouts from the productive minority by electing the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury. To maintain their power, these candidates must adopt an ever-increasing tax and spend policy to satisfy the ever-increasing desires of the majority. As taxes increase, incentive to produce decreases, causing many of the once productive to drop out and join the non-productive. When there are no longer enough producers to fund the legitimate functions of government and the socialist programs, the democracy will collapse, always to be followed by a Dictatorship.
"The Founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." Our Founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government in which the protection of individual God-given rights was the primary job of government."
Changing from the current Electoral College system to using Congressional district outcomes to determine who becomes President would effectively change our form of government into a Parlimentary system and would further disenfranchise District of Columbia residents. We who live in Washington DC have no voting representation in either chamber of Congress, but at least we get to vote for President. Tell me again: why am I paying Federal income tax to this government?
As usual, the Regressives in this country want to go backwards. The problem with the EC is that a small number of low-population states have all the power. The EC was originally constructed when we were an Agrarian society, those days are long behind us. The proper altering of the EC is to remove it and let the popular vote stand. With the proposal by these Regressives we would give even more power to even fewer people in those states. This is just backwards.
Is the media also lobbying for change? After all, most of the media buys in the last election where just in the 10 key states. Does the media in the other 40 states want their share of the spending in the elections?
Electors are not responsible for voting constituent desires which leaves room for all sorts of shenanigans...also, it's almost impossible for a third-party to win the presidency..
The Majority of Americans want to put an end to this unfair form of Voting.
The Electoral College is an outdated piece of legislation, making our process of choosing a president nothing more than an exercise in futility.
Gerrymandering is built on the ASSUMPTION that voting patterns will be CONSISTENT. What happens if the gerrymandered district shows a contrary, a-typical voting pattern? Chaos (I hope).
It is carefully constructed. Suppose a massive Democratic effort is made to undo a gerrymandered district, as an example to discredit the technique. Far-fetched? Has it been attempted?
Is this naive?
How truly effective is gerrymandering? It appears to be very effective...
Just came into the middle of the program, sorry for missing prior comments.
Please start any reform of presidential elections with the establishment of "non-partisan, non-political commissions" responsible for determining congressional districts. As long as political parties determine congressional districts, the process will be intentionally flawed, and constantly manipulated for partisan gain.
historically Democrats have been much more successful in exploiting gerrymandering.
here is the classic example of the hypocrisy:
In Texas, roughly 60% of voters cast a ballot for a Republican in the House, and 40% vote for a Democrat.
Until recently however, 60% of our congressional representation was Democrat.
Despite his flaws, Tom Delay successfully got this fixed so that now Texas's congressional representation is in line with the voting.
Of course, the Texas Democrats flipped out, and at one point ran to Oklahoma to stall the process.
They used the boilerplate claim that voters were being disenfranchised.
Meanwhile, in Massachussetts approximately 60% of voters cast a ballot for a Democrat in the House, and 40% vote for Republicans.
Yet, all 10 Congressmen from Mass. are Democrats.
I submit that Republican voters in Massachuessetts and other Blue states are the most disenfranchised.
Falsehood alert: There are lots of Democrat House members from Red states in the center of the country. Panel member got that wrong.
He did get it right that Blue states in the north east prevent Republican representation.
Have any of the Republicans realized that if Florida had allocated its electoral votes by congressional district in 2000, Al Gore would have been elected President?
As it was, even with the Republicans on the Supreme Court shutting down Florida's vote tabulation in order to give all 25 of its electoral votes to Bush, he only won by 5 votes. Gore would have easily won at least 3 CDs, giving him a majority of Electoral College votes to go with his popular vote majority.
So be careful what you wish for, GOP.
Waiting to talk instead of listening and responding. I suggest you "popular vote" proponents read up on your history. You are entirely missing the point of what "American exceptionalism " is or means. What makes this country exceptional over all others is what is written and intended by our Constitution. The rights of all the people are not to be trampled by the majority through government force, federal elections based solely on head counts would do just that.
I asked about a proportional allocation of electors. Moving to a popular vote cements in place the monopoly of the two major parties. All systems have issues, but the proportional allocation of electors does not need to wait until all the states adopt it, which I believe will never happen.
clifffromparma wrote:
"It was reported that a Mitt Romney owned group tried to install election software that was created by Romney.Completely untested. It`s the reason some speculate Karl Rove was so sure of Ohio`s election outcome on Fox News. We have the Diebold e-mails,of their CEO that guaranteed to the Republicans,they`ll get the outcome they desire,that a couple years ago.It was so repugnant,the company had to change it`s name. Sadly,Diebold still is on thr government teat,and gets many mqany taxpayer dollars. "
You never tire of repeating the falsehoods, do you cliff?
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/11/does-tagg-romney-own-ohio-voting-machines/
And voter intimidation?
You're talking about the New Black Panthers at polling places with their nightsticks, right?
Cheating?
You're talking about the Pennsylvania districts that had ZERO Romney votes out of thousands cast, right?
From ABC News, "It's one thing to lose badly to the other guy, but it's another to get absolutely no votes. None.
That's what happened to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
In the entire county, Romney scored less than 100,000 votes, putting him at a measly 14 percent. "
Facts, not made up conspiracies is what matters, cliff.
Sam T.
"The purpose of the electoral college was to instill fairness in the system of electing a president. It was to give a voice to those in rural communities in presidential elections. It was precisely created to put a check on large cities from monopolizing national elections. Some states Maine and Nebraska are not winner take all, changes to the winner take all states would indeed serve the purpose of the electoral college, it's not cheating, it's about not allowing the majority to trample the rights of the minority."
" I suggest you "popular vote" proponents read up on your history. "
Absolutely. A historical side-note is that the concept of the Electoral College did not spring full blown from the consiousness of the Founders. In fact many avenues for electing the President were explored and the Electoral College went through a number of changes before our current system (which has worked well for 200 years) emerged by the fixing of early problems that came to light.
The simple fact is, the left wants two things; the "fairness doctrine" to squelch conservative media and the popular vote in order to rule the country from the two coasts. It is the path to a liberal/progressive dictatorship. This is not complicated.
I have several comments about today’s show.
1) Purpose of the Electoral College
Leaving aside speculation about slavery (which one guest mentioned), there is no question that the original purpose of the College was to substitute for the direct election of the President. The basic idea was that instead of voting for the candidate directly, people in each State would vote for Electors, who would then actually make the choice. As Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper Number 68:
It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, . . . to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, . . . .
While, of course, this has the effect of only making “the sense of the people” indirectly involved in the process, it demonstrates that presidential elections based solely on the popular vote were not favored by the Founders.
The real problem, however, is that we have essentially abandoned this concept. Today the electors are supposed to vote in accordance with the popular will of their State, and not substitute their judgment for that of the voters. Indeed, doing so earns anyone who does the title of “faithless elector”. Thus, no matter how we apportion electoral votes, the basic concept of the system is now obsolete. At the least, we should do away with the electors altogether, and the empty ceremony of their “casting votes” to be tallied by Congress on an assigned date, as is now the practice. Instead, as the media does on Election Night, we should just count up the electoral votes based on whatever apportionment method a State has chosen.
However, this would probably require a constitutional amendment.
TO BE CONTINUED
2) Apportionment by Congressional Districts
On the other hand, attempts to select “electors” by Congressional Districts (as some have suggested) also runs up against the Founder’s intentions. From the same source:
Another and no less important desideratum was that the executive should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves.
In keeping with the doctrine of Separation of Powers, this seems to be a clear statement that the Presidency was to be completely independent, electorally, from Congress. Apportioning electoral votes by Congressional Districts appears to violate this principle, and indeed transforms the President into a mere Prime Minister (who is selected by the majority party in the British House of Commons). I therefore question the Constitutionality of the proposal.
TO BE CONTINUED
3) Proportional Voting
The guest from the “FairVote” movement argues strenuously against “winner take all” (also known as “majority rule”) voting, and instead advocates other alternatives. These include proportional voting (where the electoral votes are divided according to the popular vote), and a form of “at large” voting (where there are several Congressional “slots” to be filled in a district). All of this to give “minority” voters a chance to elect a candidate. He especially urges these ideas in connection with legislative races (at both the State and Federal level).
With all due respect, I think this is a terrible idea. On the presidential level it will not produce what he thinks: campaigns throughout the U.S. A more likely result will be (as many callers urged) campaigns targeted at those States, districts, or areas, where the greatest number of votes are to be gained - making high population States or areas the prime targets. Does he really believe that with modern technology and polling techniques, which already enable campaigns to be “fine tuned”, and which have vastly “improved” the ability to gerrymander, that elections based purely on popular votes can’t be “fine tuned” and “gerrymandered” as well?
Plus, of course, this will require an constitutional amendment.
TO BE CONTINUED