Nebraska to be winner-take-all? (because Obama won Omaha)

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Matha Stoddard

LINCOLN - Nebraska would rejoin the majority of states with a winner-take-all electoral vote under a bill expected to be introduced in the Legislature today.

State Sen. Beau McCoy of Omaha plans to offer the proposal when lawmakers gather for the second day of the 2010 session.

Currently, Nebraska is one of two states that allow for split electoral college votes. The other is Maine.

Three of the state's five electoral college votes go to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in each congressional district. The remaining two votes go to the candidate who wins the statewide vote.

Read more: http://www.omaha.com/article/20100107/NEWS01/100109771

[depakid]

1. Moving backwards toward more structural dysfunction

Heck of a job!

[Mz Pip]

2. I don't know how I feel about this

Winner take all disenfranchises much of a state. But a couple of years ago there was a move to divvie up CA electoral votes and it created quite a shit storm. No one was pushing to have the electoral votes divided up in the Red States, like Texas where there are liberal regions. A big chunk of CA is pretty conservative when you get out of the coastal and city regions.

If this is to be done fairly then it needs to happen in all states and not just a few.

[Unvanguard]

3. Agreed. n/t

[Hawaii Hiker]

7. Oh, do I remember that CA. attempt to split their electoral votes

I truly lost sleep over that....Seriously, had something like that passed, the Republican nominee, whose a near certainty to lose the state, could STILL rack up between 18-22 electoral votes (out of 55) even though the he/she loses the state by 15% or more.....Think about that, lose the state, & still obtain more electoral votes than what some good size states like PA (19 ev's), Michigan (17 ev's), NJ (15 ev's) have...

I think Maine should switch to winner take all to...Let's have all states on the same playing field.....

[Exultant Democracy]

4. Sad, but it doesn't make sense to be one of the two states that do it.

[Wink]

5. It should be one person one vote. Except....

...we would really have to watch the republican controlled vote stealing machines. There's no logical reason that everyone's vote shouldn't be counted equally. Enough with the bs gerrymandering.

[Lucky Luciano]

6. More like one dollar one vote! nt

[Roland99]

14. +1 ($)

[No Elephants]

15. If you mean doing away with the electoral college, that would require a

Constitutional amendment. If you mean every state shouldd apportion its electoral votes, like Nebraska did in 2009, states could decide on their own to do that, but I am not sure who it would help more, Republicans or Democrats. Of the top of my head, I would say the latter. If I am correct, then I would favor it.

The electoral college no doubt made lots of sense in 1787, but it makes no sense now. However, I fear we are stuck with it for the foreseeable future.

[yellowcanine]

8. State Sen. Heath Mello of Omaha, a Democrat, called the proposal "the Republican sour grapes bill."

Got that right. Regardless of the merits, it seems like a curious time to be bringing this up.

[Doctor_J]

9. Can't win? Change the rules!

the Repuke way.

[Omaha Steve]

10. Because of the split college vote

Obama was the first D to come to Nebraska (He and Michelle for the caucus) to run for President since Bobby Kennedy. We had both Clintons here last Fall. And Sarah's visit could not stop Omaha from flipping BLUE! I like this system as is.

Senator Mellow is a wonderful Dem. See the post in GD about his Medicaid proposal for Ne.

OS

[DallasNE]

11. I Wondered How Long This Would Take

Nebraska actually benefitted last election under current law because both Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton campaigned in Omaha for their respective candidates, bringing in both media attention and money, which will disappear under the proposed legislation. Indeed, this is a "Republican sour grapes" bill if I ever saw one.

[mvymvy]

12. 74% of Nebraska Voters Support a National Popular Vote

74% of Nebraska Voters Support a National Popular Vote AND
Prefer it to District System or Winner-Take-All 

A survey of 800 Nebraska voters conducted on December 22-23,
2008 showed 74% overall support for a national popular vote
for President.

In a follow-up question presenting a three-way choice among
various methods of awarding Nebraska’s electoral votes,

    * 60% favored a national popular vote;
    * 28% favored Nebraska’s current system of awarding its
electoral votes by congressional district; and
    * 13% favored the statewide winner-take-all system (i.e.,
awarding all of Nebraska’s electoral votes to the candidate
who receives the most votes statewide).

When presented with the basic question of a national popular
vote, support for a national popular vote was, by political
affiliation, 79% among Democrats, 70% among Republicans, and
75% among Others.

By congressional district, support for a national popular vote
was 77% in the First congressional district, 68% in the Second
district; and 77% in the Third District. As you know, the
Second district voted for Obama in November 2008, and Obama
received one electoral vote by virtue of carrying the Second
district.

By age, support for a national popular vote was 64% among
18-29 year olds, 72% among 30-45 year olds, 73% among 46-65
year olds, and 79% for those older than 65.

By gender, support for a national popular vote was 82% among
women and 66% among men.

By race, support for a national popular vote was 75% among
whites (representing 88% of respondents), 56% among African
Americans (representing 4% of respondents), 75% among
Hispanics (representing 1% of respondents), and 67% among
Others (representing 7% of respondents). 

see www.NationalPopularVote.com

[mvymvy]

13. The National Popular Vote bill

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency
to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50
states (and DC). 

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and
equal in presidential elections. 

The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical
form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral
votes--that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President
(270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the
electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the
presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in
all 50 states (and DC). 

The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its
electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law
on how those votes are awarded. 

The bill is currently endorsed by over 1,659 state legislators
(in 48 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes
in favor of the bill. 

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. This
national result is similar to recent polls in closely divided
battleground states: Colorado-- 68%, Iowa --75%, Michigan--
73%, Missouri-- 70%, New Hampshire-- 69%, Nevada-- 72%, New
Mexico-- 76%, North Carolina-- 74%, Ohio-- 70%, Pennsylvania
-- 78%, Virginia -- 74%, and Wisconsin -- 71%; in smaller
states (3 to 5 electoral votes): Delaware --75%, Maine -- 77%,
Nebraska -- 74%, New Hampshire --69%, Nevada -- 72%, New
Mexico -- 76%, Rhode Island -- 74%, and Vermont -- 75%;  in
Southern and border states: Arkansas --80%, Kentucky -- 80%,
Mississippi --77%, Missouri -- 70%, North Carolina -- 74%, and
Virginia -- 74%; and in other states polled: California --
70%, Connecticut -- 74% , Massachusetts -- 73%, New York --
79%, Washington -- 77%, and West Virginia -- 81%.  Support is
strong in every partisan and demographic group surveyed.

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 29 state legislative
chambers, in 19 small, medium-small, medium, and large states,
including one house in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon,  and
both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New
Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Washington. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New
Jersey, Maryland, and Washington. These five states possess 61
electoral votes -- 23% of the 270 necessary to bring the law
into effect.

See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com