Red Alert: Tom Gangale explains it all for you

The other day, while checking the California Attorney General's initiatives page for new news, I found that yet a third group has submitted an initiative meant to change the allocation of California's Electoral College votes. On my Red Alert! page I noted it, and asked the question:

And who the hell are these guys (CURE "California United to Reform Elections")??? Their initiative was received in the Attorney General's office on August 27. I read it quickly — and it doesn't pass the smell test. Besides, it appears to be very badly drafted. Some clarification on this soon, I hope.

Clarification comes from Tom Gangale, who is really on top of this issue and seems to be as obsessed by it as I am. He answers my question at his blog, Out of the Blue, Into the Black. [Gangale's bona fides: he's an aerospace engineer, Democratic activist and author of From the Primaries to the Polls: How to Repair America's Broken Presidential Nomination Process. At the California Progress Report he has a great piece casting the math behind the GOP initiative in the familiar terms of baseball.]

Gangale explicates this most recent initiative and tells us just what's wrong with it. (And he brings up the whole question of whether changing the method of choosing electors by initiative — rather than by legislative action — would pass Constitutional muster):

Yet another proposal to change the way California casts its 55 electoral votes may result in voters being so confused that they'll vote down all three initiatives. Note that the report states, "A surprise third initiative filed last week by a small, relatively unknown group would allocate electoral votes in proportion to the popular vote in California once a majority of states adopt a similar system." First of all, it is NOT proportional allocation by popular vote; it is allocation by congressional district like the Hiltachk (Republican) initiative. Secondly, the proviso "once a majority of states adopt a similar system" makes it sound more reasonable than the Hiltachk initiative, but is it? Which states? Red states? Blue states? A majority consisting of mostly small states could total far less than 270 electoral votes, which constitutes an electoral majority.

While we're going crazy with filing one initiative after another, it might be important to point out that the 1969 Maine law and the 1991 Nebraska law allocating those states' electoral votes by congressional district were enacted by their legislatures. The US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 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...." The legislature may direct the manner of appointing electors, but may the people do so via a ballot initiative? It may be that James Madison trumps Hiram Johnson.

The report he cites is an excellent piece by John Marelius at the San Diego Union-Tribune. It's a terrific roundup. Read it and keep it handy.