The Republican Party is in utter disarray.
Rampant corruption, scandal, and incompetence let the reins of power slip out of the party’s hands in the 2006 elections. After losing control of Congress, it looks as though Republicans will be evicted from the White House next. Indeed, the old party is no longer so grand. The euphoria is over. It’s the morning after, and America has a terrible headache.
But while the country is trying to cure its hangover, California Republicans want to keep the party going.
Instead of passing around drinks, they’re passing around petitions to change the way California allots its fifty-five electoral votes in the 2008 presidential race. In an effort to maintain the White House, California Republicans filed ballot initiative number 07-0032, also known as the Presidential Election Reform Act.
The measure will bring an end to California’s winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes to candidates.
Normally, the candidate who wins the statewide popular vote receives all fifty-five of California’s electoral votes.
The initiative proposes to give electoral votes according to the number of congressional districts each candidate carries. Since there are 53 congressional districts, the two remaining electoral votes would be granted to the winner of the statewide popular vote.
At first glance, this doesn’t seem like a bad idea. The Electoral College is a bogus way of electing presidents, right? Wouldn’t this be more democratic?
Not really.
With the exceptions of Maine and Nebraska, the rest of the country will still award its electoral votes to presidential candidates on a winner-take-all basis. Therefore, in effect, the California election will be contested under a set of rules that is different from practically every other state in the union.
Of course, there is a clear and cynical reason why Republicans want to change the rules in the 2008 election.
If these new rules pass, it will hand the Republican presidential candidate a highly advantageous nest egg of electoral votes.
For instance, playing by this proposed set of rules, President Bush would have garnered an extra twenty-two electoral votes in the 2004 election. That’s hardly small change in the game of electoral politics. It basically amounts to the number of electoral votes a presidential candidate earns by winning the state of Ohio.
No matter how terribly Republicans have governed over the last few years, it would be difficult for any Democratic presidential candidate to surmount an Ohio-sized electoral advantage.
To make matters worse, the backers of the reform act will not introduce the initiative in the much-anticipated election on Feb. 5 , but rather the less popular election on June 3.
Dark political cynicism is at play. Few Californians are aware that there is still a June 3 primary election. Republicans are betting that voter turnout will be low enough to sneak this shameless power-grab past the public’s eyes.
In fairness, the Democratic Party is no stranger to this brand of sleazy politics. Recently, Democrats in the North Carolina state legislature attempted to write a law similar to the initiative Republicans have proposed in our state.
However, Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean rightly convinced the state legislature to table the bill.
No one needs to remind the Democratic Party about the flaws of the Electoral College.
After all, Al Gore would have been elected president in 2000 if it were not for the Electoral College.
As unfair as the current process can be, it would be more unfair to pass electoral reform on a state-by-state basis. America’s presidential elections should be contested under uniform rules. Anything less would subvert the democratic process. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a lifelong Republican, agrees: He argues against his party’s initiative because he doesn’t like “to change the rules in the middle of the game.”
The upcoming academic year at UCLA will be extraordinarily political.
You will be asked to sign all sorts of things on behalf of various causes, but remember your mother’s advice about going to parties: watch your cup closely; you never know what someone might put in it when you’re not looking.
As cheesy as your mom’s advice may be, it certainly applies here. Be careful about which petitions you sign when you’re on Bruin Walk. If you don’t pay close attention, your signature might contribute to this ruthless Republican power grab.
Now that’s something you will wake up regretting in the morning.
Kleckner is the president of Bruin Democrats and a fourth-year political science student.