Republican Legislature May Back Off Voter-Disenfranchisement Bills for All the Wrong Reasons (Updated)
With each passing day, the Republican Legislature’s plans to give democracy a roundhouse kick to the jugular receives a setback. This time around, it was Pennsylvania’s Republican representation in the Washington Garbage Heap that applied the much needed “Hold on, let’s think about this” brakes.
According to subscription-only Capitolwire, the Pennsylvania Republican plan to award electoral college votes based on the presidential candidate’s winning of each congressional district rather than a winner-take-all system, currently used by 48 states, was the topic of conversation at a Harrisburg meeting of the minds yesterday. As was the Voter ID legislation proposed earlier this year by Rep. Daryl Metcalf of Butler County, whose legislative scumbaggery has tackled everything from illegal immigration to Obama’s birth certificate to [insert right wing straw man here]. Via Capitolwire:
Eleven members of the state’s 12-member congressional Republican delegation met with Senate leaders this afternoon…The congressmen also voiced opposition in both meetings to Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi’s proposal to split up the state’s 20 electoral votes by congressional district, in 2012. Pileggi, R-Delaware, heard out comments against his proposal from U.S. Reps. Bill Shuster, R-Blair, Tim Murphy, R-Allegheny, Jim Gerlach, R-Chester, Charlie Dent, R-Lehigh and Meehan.
So, are we to believe some state Republicans’ coal-burnt hearts grew three sizes that day?
Don’t count on it. According to an unnamed member of the Congressional delegation, Pennsylvania’s U.S. representation has “concerns about [the plan], and how it will look and how it could make the party and all of us look.”
Translation: ‘We can’t let the public to know what we are.’ And those in relatively safe Republican districts (which will become safer once redistricting ends) don’t want to have to, you know, work. Or spend money. (Note: House GOP leaders are now saying that congressional leaders expressed “support” of the bill.)
Add to that the possibility they’re becoming aware that the public is in tune to their game. A just-released Quinnipiac poll found that, by a 52-40 margin, Pennsylvanians are against this shift from a winner-takes-all to district-by-district electoral college windjob. The numbers, say Quinnipiac, show “how tuned in Pennsylvanians are to this issue.”
And if you’re a swing state Republican, that’s the last thing you want.
As Think Progress notes of the situation, it’s particularly interesting that Republicans are backing off Voter ID legislation, as well, since such voting schemes meant to disenfranchise the poor, minorities and students “have been the centerpiece of the Republican Party’s war on voting,” and would disproportionately affect Democrat voters.
Turns out, members of congress keeping their own seats may be more important than the cheat-to-win “good of the party.” Which means, if these pieces of legislation come to a halt, it’ll prove once again, in politics, two (or more) wrongs can, once in a while, make a right.
Image: Shutterstock
Most Pennsylvania voters want a national popular vote.
A survey of 800 Pennsylvania voters conducted on December 16-17, 2008 showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
Support was 87% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among independents.
By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 81% among 46-65 year olds, and 78% for those older than 65.
By gender, support was 85% among women and 71% among men.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states would get the 270+ electoral votes from the enacting states. That majority of electoral votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states wins the presidency.
National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in each state and district (in ME and NE). Now their votes are counted only for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.
With National Popular Vote, elections wouldn’t be about winning states or districts (in ME and NE). No more distorting and divisive red and blue state and district maps. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast.
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). The recent Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University poll shows 72% support for direct nationwide election of the President. Support is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed iin recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO– 68%, IA –75%, MI– 73%, MO– 70%, NH– 69%, NV– 72%, NM– 76%, NC– 74%, OH– 70%, PA — 78%, VA — 74%, and WI — 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE –75%, ME — 77%, NE — 74%, NH –69%, NV — 72%, NM — 76%, RI — 74%, and VT — 75%; in Southern and border states: AR –80%, KY — 80%, MS –77%, MO — 70%, NC — 74%, and VA — 74%; and in other states polled: CA — 70%, CT — 74% , MA — 73%, MN – 75%, NY — 79%, WA — 77%, and WV- 81%.
On Election Night, most voters don’t care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district… they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans consider the idea of the candidate with the most popular votes being declared a loser detestable. We don’t allow this in any other election in our representative republic.
The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC (3), HI (4), IL (19), NJ (14), MD (11), MA (10), CA (55), VT (3), and WA (13). These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes — 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
NationalPopularVote
[...] employees helped campaign Philly Clout: Romney and Perry neck in neck in new Quinnipiac Poll of PA Phillynow: Republican Legislature may back off voter disenfranchisement bills for all the wrong reasons [...]