<blockquote>Amendment 36 for electoral college reform replaces the current winner-take-all electoral system with one that allocates the state's electoral college votes proportionately to a candidate's popular vote. Colorado would join two other states -- Maine and Nebraska -- that have rejected in a deliberate way the winner-take-all system. Proposed by Make Your Vote Count and endorsed by Libertarians, Greens, Democrats and the NAACP, the initiative is a "one person, one vote" system.
The Nader/Camejo campaign believes the winner-take-all election system pushes voters to vote their fears and not their beliefs. The US needs to support electoral systems that allow more voters to vote for the candidates they support. ("Nader/Camejo Campaign Endorses Ballot Initiatives in Colorado: Citizen Initiatives 35, 36 and 37 Shift Taxes to Addictive Industries, Reform the Electoral College, and Support Renewable Energy," <http://www.votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=348>)</blockquote>
<blockquote>The last and most mind-boggling wrinkle comes from Colorado. On Nov. 2, the same day that Coloradans vote for president, they will vote on a state constitutional amendment that would change their current winner-take-all system to a new situation that would give candidates electoral votes according to their portion in the statewide vote for president. And the language of the amendment states that it would take effect immediately; if it passes, it would affect this presidential race.
Recent polls show Bush leading in Colorado by 5 to 9 percentage points. If the final vote turns out that way, and the constitutional amendment fails, Bush would get all nine of Colorado's electoral votes. If the amendment passes, Bush would get five electoral votes and Kerry would get four.
One Colorado voter has already filed a preemptive lawsuit challenging the immediate application of the new system if the measure, known as Amendment 36, passes. The state's Republican governor has pledged that if the amendment passes and costs Bush the presidency, he will challenge it in court.
In September, polls showed the "yes" vote on Amendment 36 running ahead of the "no." But of three polls during October, two showed the amendment running behind and one showed the question too close to call.
University of Colorado law Prof. Paul Campos, in a Rocky Mountain News column, recently opined: "Put it this way: if the identity of the next president ends up depending on the passage and enforcement of Amendment 36, then we'll see a series of lawsuits that will make Bush v. Gore look like a modest exercise of judicial discretion." (Erick Black, "Presidential Race Really Is a State-by-State Battle." October 25, 2004, <http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5049623.html>)</blockquote> -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * OSU-GESO: <http://www.osu-geso.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>