Rocky Mountain Hijinks
The Bush reelection campaign will want to begin paying serious attention to a scheme now underway in Colorado to alter the formula by which that state awards its votes in the Electoral College. Like 47 other states and the District of Columbia, Colorado has traditionally allocated its electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis–to whichever candidate secures a statewide popular plurality. (Maine and Nebraska give their overall popular ballot winner a two-electoral-vote “bonus” and then divvy up the remainder according to who comes out on top in each congressional district.) Thus it was that in 2000 George W. Bush, with 50.8 percent of Colorado’s popular vote (to 42.4 percent for the second-place Al Gore), won the state’s entire 8-vote Electoral College allotment.
Not incidentally, Bush’s total Electoral College margin was a mere 5 votes: 271 to 266. And it ought to have been just 4; one Gore elector in the District of Columbia withheld his vote “in protest.”
So, also not incidentally, Democrats who live in Colorado (financed almost entirely by Democrats who don’t live in Colorado) are now collecting signatures for a November ballot initiative that would alter the state’s Electoral College allocation formula–beginning with this year’s presidential election. Should the “Make Your Vote for President Count” initiative succeed, Colorado’s electoral votes will be proportionally awarded according to its popular-vote results. If George W. Bush again wins 50.8 percent of Colorado’s popular vote, for example, he’ll be allowed to claim only 50.8 percent of its Electoral College delegation (rounded to the nearest vote), not the whole thing. And had this rule been in effect last time around, for further example, Bush and Gore would have split Colorado’s electoral votes, 5 to 3–a 6-vote swing that all by itself would have put Gore in the White House.
To the obvious objection–that their plan looks and smells like the purest, rawest partisanship–its sponsors respond indignantly. It’s a matter of simple principle, don’t you know: “What we are proposing to do, at least in Colorado,” says (Democratic campaign consultant) Rick Ridder, the initiative’s lead operative, “is to come much closer to the notion of one-man, one-vote.” And (Democratic) state senator Ron Tupa, a high school government teacher, agrees. How’s he supposed to explain to his students an electoral process that elevates George W. Bush to the presidency despite the fact that Al Gore won more votes? “People can’t understand why we have this kind of system that seems so outdated and hasn’t been reformed in 200 years.”
Funny then, isn’t it, that Sen. Tupa & Co. are proposing a “reform” that works best, for their purposes, only if all the other states don’t adopt it? Had a proportional-allocation system been in effect in Colorado–and nowhere else–on Election Day 2000, Al Gore would indeed have been elected president. But had the very same plan been in force throughout the country, it turns out it wouldn’t have made much difference at all. We’ve done the math: Bush would have lost a single electoral vote–to Ralph Nader–but Gore would still have been three votes short. In other words, the popular vote winner would still have been denied an ultimate victory. Surely this is not what the new Colorado initiative’s backers (pretend to) have in mind.
Also, we can’t help wondering why the sponsors and financiers of “Make Your Vote for President Count” aren’t similarly active in, say, California and New York, where in 2000 such a plan would have transferred a whopping 36 electoral votes from Gore to Bush. Curious, no?
King Midas in Reverse
Speaking of Al Gore, how’s about this amazing piece of testimony concerning the former vice president’s matchless talent for poisoning whatever political cause is foolish enough to let him come within spitting distance. In a lengthy June 9 interview with Christopher Graff of the AP, former Vermont governor and presidential frontrunner Howard Dean, “relaxed in a sweater and jeans,” and occasionally allowing himself a “rare display of emotion,” fondly remembers his legions of supporters and ponders what went wrong:
Anybody want to take a guess how many times John Kerry and Al Gore will appear together in public this fall?
Dead Horse Beat Report
Someone claiming to be Air America talk-show host Al Franken phoned our offices last week seeking clarification of a recent SCRAPBOOK item about the real-life Mr. Franken’s possible 2008 U.S. Senate campaign in Minnesota. Judging from this fellow’s amusing, spot-on vocal mimicry and the impressive discipline with which he remained “in character” throughout the conversation, we figured our caller for a pro: a talented comic actor. Furthermore, the man was calm, reasonable, and friendly–charming, even. In short: He must’ve taken THE SCRAPBOOK for a complete idiot or something. “Al Franken,” indeed.
But what the hell, let’s play along.
“First of all, I was not born in Minnesota,” Mr. Franken’s doppelgänger informed us. A reference in the June 3 Sacramento Bee to his “native Minnesota” notwithstanding, “I was actually born in New York and moved to Albert Lea, Minnesota, when I was 4.” His mother’s family owned a quilting business, see, and his father thought Albert Lea would make an excellent place to site a new factory because there was a rail line running through the town. Except that “the railroad didn’t stop in Albert Lea,” a fact the Frankens discovered only after they’d arrived. “So we moved to Minneapolis.”
Memo to the genuine Al Franken, wherever you are: Think hard on this Albert Lea parable before again relocating to Minnesota. There are voters in that state, it’s true. Whether they will pay you any mind is quite another question, however.
But we digress. “Secondly,” the faux phone Franken advised us, “I named three members of the congressional delegation” from Minnesota when interviewed by the Bee: only “one House member” out of eight, but “both senators,” as well. “Of course, I knew the names of the senators.”
Finally, this gentleman politely but firmly objected to our suggestion that the Bee had “quoted Franken gushing” about a recent conversation he’d had with Hillary Clinton. Not so, he said: “I don’t think I gushed.”
THE SCRAPBOOK–or someone claiming to be THE SCRAPBOOK, at any rate–is pleased to correct the record.
Congratulations!
The sixth annual Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Journalism has been awarded to Daniel Henninger, deputy editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Sponsored by the Eric Breindel Memorial Foundation, and generously supported by News Corporation, Breindel’s longtime employer and this magazine’s corporate parent, the award is the richest honor in opinion journalism, carrying a prize of $10,000. It is presented each year to the columnist or editorialist whose work best reflects the spirit that animated Breindel’s own writing: love of country, commitment to democratic institutions, and determination to bear witness to the evils of totalitarianism.
