Pa. Republicans have a Plan B to steal the 2016 presidential election
The New Castle News is reporting that Harrisburg legislative powerhouse Sen. Dominic Pileggi has yet another scheme in which Pennsylvania would award a number of electoral votes to the losing candidate under a system not used in any of the other 49 states.
Pa. Republicans have a Plan B to steal the 2016 presidential election
They just won't quit, will they? The New Castle News (where I get most of my information these days*) is reporting that Harrisburg legislative powerhouse Sen. Dominic Pileggi has yet another scheme in which Pennsylvania would award a number of electoral votes to the losing candidate under a system not used in any of the other 49 states.
As you may know, the losing candidate in every presidential election in Pennsylvania since 1988 has been a Republican. In 2012, President Obama got just under 52 percent of the popular vote and all 20 electoral votes. That's because Pennsylvania -- like 47 other states and D.C. -- awards those electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. (Two smaller states -- Nebraska and Maine -- award some of their votes by individual congressional district.)
At this particular quirky moment in American history, there are a surprising number of states that have Republican legislatures and governors but are trending solidly Democratic for president, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Virginia, Florida...and Pennsylvania. As if by magic, lawmakers in each of these states showed up for the new year with schemes to pick presidential electors on a variation of the Maine-Nebraska method. Because the Democratic vote has been so overwhelming in some urban congressional districts, with the Republicans winning more suburban and rural districts by by smaller margins, the swing in electoral votes could be dramatic.
In Pennsylvania, a change proposed by some GOP lawmakers last month would have given 2012's Mitt Romney 12 of the 20 state electoral votes, despite garnering just 47 percent of the popular ballot. Similar schemes were reduced in other key states...and then something remarkable happened.
Common sense.
Procedurally, the only thing that could have stopped such legislation was a sense of decency, at long last, and many key Republicans looked at this scheme and couldn't stomach it -- even GOP die-hards like Wisconsin's Paul Ryan and Governors Rick Scott (Fla.) and Bob McDonnell (Va.) In Pennsylvania, the scheme also faltered because some powerful Republican swing district congressmen feared that forcing the 2016 Democratic White House hopeful to intensely compete for an electoral vote in their home district could cause them to lose.
So comes now Pileggi with Plan B. The district scheme is out; instead, electoral votes would be awarded proportionally, guaranteeing the loser would pick up some free tallies that he or she would not have received under the systems used by every other state. In 2012, loser Romney would have received 8 of the 20 electoral votes. Last year, that would not have made a difference. In 2016, in a closer race....who knows?
Last night, a Democratic state lawmaker, Rep. Mike Sturia, told the website Think Progress that Pileggi, his legislative allies and Gov. Corbett could all but click their heels and make this thing the law of the land in just four days:
They could have it out of the House in three days and it could go over to the Senate and they could have it out of there in three days and it could go to the governor’s office and he could sign it. . . . The Senate can suspend the rules and have it passed in less than 24 hours. [The House] has to have a 2/3s majority to suspend the rules so usually we can at least make them do the three days.
Call me a crazy optimist, but I'm betting in the end this won't happen. I sure hope it doesn't. For one thing, Pennsylvania has way too many problems -- falling bridges and failing schools come to mind -- to waste valable hours on this election-stealing nonsense. In the bigger picture -- and I doubt this could happen -- I would love to see an amendment to ensure that federal elections are governed by one federal set of rules. That's just common sense -- imagine the fan outcry if the NFL used a different rulebook for games played in Louisiana than it did for contests in Maryland. If pro football can do it, why can't America.
Creating a system to elect the president should be guided by fairness and logic.
Pennsylvania's grade so far is "incomplete."
* Sarcasm
CoolZ: That was an extremely well thought out, logical argument. Dont Let the GOP Hear it, or they will steal it and claim it as their own lol (HTML deleted)— ai720jrzy- CoolZ: That was an extremely well thought out, logical argument. Dont Let the GOP Hear it, or they will steal it and claim it as their own lol
— ai720jrzy - The GOP died when they changed their bylaws to block legitimate Ron Paul delegates from voting to nominate Ron Paul in 2012...
I, for one, was a GOP card-carrying member since I was able to vote. I have since withdrawn my registration.— USAFirst1 - If every state gave electoral votes proportionatey, that's OK. But the GOP wants it only in blue states. A better option would be the national popular vote. www.nationalpopularvote.com— D Julien
- This is just an admission by the party of the old, the pale and the crazy that their time is up. In twenty years, the Republican party will have as much relevance to national politics as the Whigs. California is a preview: the Republican party barely exists in Cali. It just takes the rest of the country a little while to catch up to the Golden state.— Last Man Standing
- we want our country back, waaah. lol— high water
- "Where are all the jobs? When are you going to cut spending?" The awesomeness of this post cannot be understated. I'm sure Pileggi loves being attached to this scheme. Wonder what he did to get this punishment? In the larger scheme of things, this is another dea1h rattle. Something has to be done to combat Democratic efforts in FL to have voters not have to wait on line for 9 hours to vote. What's not clear to me is whether this is considered an experimental phase, for other states eventual adoption, and whether, if the state legislature changes back to Dem control, will the law just be repealed?— Murrayman
- "Similar schemes were reduced in other key states..."
"reduced" ?
or "produced" ?— ekw555 - Bunch is obviously more concerned with the optics of this than the actual outcome of an election, since it's already been pointed out that other than 2000 this would not have effected any in recent memory.
He would, however, how a much harder time trying to toe the company line that winning an election by 2% is a mandate creating landslide. The electoral college allows him to pretend that a very slim victory is really a huge deal.— barlowjames1 - Pennsylvania should join the group of states that have signed on to the National Popular Vote Act. Once enough states have signed on to equal 270 or more electoral votes, they agree, as a group, to award all of their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, no matter the outcome in any of the individual states. This ensures that the popular vote winner wins the election.— Ed Crocheron
- Hey Bartleby, check out the fine Democrtic gerrymandering job which has been done right next door in Maryland, both parties are run by thieves.— rfitz
- Sure, let's have proportional winning of electoral votes--for the entire country. Otherwise, no. This is a blatant attempt to steal elections, much like Republican gerrymandering schemes (in Texas, for instance).— Bartleby
- Take away the voting rights of those on Welfare and Foodstamps and Obama would be unemployed !— rfitz
- The New Castle News (where I get most of my information these days*)...I rarely agree with you Will, but on this quote of yours I do. Clearly the Inky doesn't print news any more, just Philly Democratic and Lefty propaganda...certainly not news.— cb54
- Had the republicans just included minorities into their party they would be the party of Lincoln again instead of the party of Lincoln Rockwell...— defiore14
- How come I'm not worried? Because Republicans are LOSERS. That's how come.— how_come
- This comment has been deleted.— NoRoger_NoRerun_NoRent
- *yawn* Don't quit your day job.
— wokmaster - *yawn* — wokmaster
- Shouldn't elections be like today's liberal kids sports leagues? Everyone should get a trophy just for showing up....— Wiseman6
- Vote-Fraud Ruling Shifts Pennsylvania Senate
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/19/us/vote-fraud-ruling-shifts-pennsylvania-senate.html
Tea, just the R's steal elections.....right?— STEPHEN1988 - Will is a Truther, enough said!— STEPHEN1988
- I am so tired of PA Republicans and Corbett trying to steal elections. It's simply un-American. Disagree with the results but don't try to over ride them. I don't know maybe get better ideas.— jonline
- Why is there no talk of doing this in Texas, Arizona or other Red States?— KJ6710
- perhaps if the republicans allowed cows to vote in the sparsely populated districts..........— joegrink
- Will the suburban vote 'understand' this in November, 2014?— Cuddles
- does anyone know any good real estate in those 0 Romney vote neighborhoods? I'm looking to move to Philadelphia— 420Phillie
- Plenty of trash-filled lots and abandoned houses. Bonus: your first hit of crack is free! — DeltaV
- republicans 2016: if you can't beat em... cheat.— Ryan
- I am all for an Electoral vote for each Congressional District. That way the States Bunch mentioned, VA, FL, MI, PA, WI won't have the big blue, voter fraud cities like Richmond, Miami, Philly, Detroit & Milwaukee deciding the Presidency for the entire state!— keapitreal
- this is ridiculous. who do you even look yourself in the mirror and say you are an american who believes in democracy?
- Sounds like democracy to me: each electoral vote is tied to a representative or senator. This way, each district gets to pick their president, instead of just each state; devolution of the vote closer to the people.
Leave the two senators 'votes' to the overall popular winner of the state.— DeltaV - each district gets to pick their president
in other words, country folk pick the president because one country folk vote is equal to a million suburb and city votes. this obviously is yet another perversion from the perverse republican party. - Congressional districts are already based on population. The ratio is not one to one million. — DeltaV
- The legislative pay raise was child's play compared with this power grab.— a4049412
- I would like a uniform system, but we would have to change the Constitution, which states: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." There is a movement to get states to agree to vote for the winner of the popular vote, but it seems to have bogged down without enough states supporting it to put it into effect.— Archimedes
- yes pennsylvania now is the only state seriously considering this gerry rigging. here's hoping the republicans do this. i can't imagine anything securing Corbett's fate as a one term governor faster then if he tries this in Pennsylvania.— high water
- Just one more example for reasons newspapers are going the way of the dinosaurs. I'm enjoying watching their slow and torturous demise.— Chantal
- "Steal an election"? So, it's OK for 2 other states to do proportional votes, but PA is "stealing" something? Wow.— verve
- Yeah, because those states have quite fewer congressional districts and they are not gerrymandered by the repubs the way PA is. The majority of voters in PA are Democrats, yet only a couple of congressional districts have Dem majorities. Look at the District map sometime and tell me if it makes any sense, except to a republican. — mike l
- I have to agree with you on the stupid districting. I find that to be a separate issue from calling a proportional vote "stealing." Also, I'm not a Republican.
— verve - Complain about Will all you want but none of you have defended the PA GOP because you know it's a bunch of BS. It's ridiculous. Bunch of sore losers. You have the nerve to call Will a whiner. Yes, I do know he's a voice of the left but I also know you continue to read his stuff.— 19147
- This is a plan to make PA politically irrelevant. Who would campaign in PA when its votes will essentially be split? This might sound good to republicans now, but what if they ever wanted to/needed to win the state's 20 electoral votes? Pennsylvania has more important issues that need to be solved than changing its electoral votes for an election 4 years away.— CoolZanna
- If a proportional system (not necessarily saying this one, but I've considered it wrong since elementary school that a candidate can win, say, California with 50 electoral votes by a single vote) were enacted nationwide, the candidates would have to campaign on national issues, instead of just pandering to Ohio and Florida. — DeltaV
- Consider this Will: if PA and other states used this system in 2000, Al Gore would have been elected president and we probably wouldn't have invaded Iraq. OTOH, you wouldn't have had as much to gripe about for the past 12 years.— Moe_Syzlak
- perhaps you can send some black panthers out to the rural parts of the state to help them vote the right way.— rysagr
- So instead, the people in urban areas get to vote for the whole state....those in rural areas are under-represented. How is this fair?— SuziSaul
- Wait. So the state voted by 52% to be democratic yet only 4 of our representatives are democratic. Since Philly and Pittsburgh are democratic is reasonable to say those 4 seats came from there. Now if more than half the state voted democratic you would think more than 1/2 the representatives would be to but they are not. Therefore the cities are under represented in the states gerrymandered districting. — jonline
- how is it fair that a candidate could win more votes, but lose the electoral votes of the state? how is that fair in republican boondocks?
- everyone gets one vote. small towns are small because no one wants to live there.
rednecks have representatives and that's how it's fair. - Ponderous leftist whining.— Mr. Smith
- Because, Will, there is such a thing as state's rights. You may not like it, but we are not a democracy or even a federal dictatorship. States have the ability to determine for themselves how they will choose who represents them in Congress, and how they choose and proportion their electoral votes.— Mirror
Will continues to show he's a mouthpiece for the far left. Keep up the good work, loser!- And Bunch swallows hook, line and sinker 0bama going 59-0 against Romney in 59 precincts and gets all 20,000 votes cast.
Not one person out of 20,000 voted incorrectly or accidently in any of those 59 precincts and Bunch buys every bit of it. I guess simple statistics is too advanced for him.— mephisto - Yes, Will, the black helicopters are circling the Faire Countrie Towne of Philadelphia as we speak. Instead of adding to the division, why don't you propose a solution that isn't one sided for the left.— FletcherT
- So, since most Pennsylvanians vote Democratic, thankfully, you mean to take away their vote? Typical republican, you are. Can't win, cheat. — mike l
- I have a solution! Let the winner of the state popular vote get all of that state's electoral votes. Oh wait, that's what currently happens in 48 OUT OF 50 states.
Can't win a national election? Why not just rig the Electoral College instead!?— mikemimbs
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
