The name game continues in California

Backers of a California initiative that could significantly aid the next Republican presidential nominee said today they're still collecting signatures to qualify it for the state's ballot in June, terming as premature reports that they have wrapped up the process.

"The goal is to be completed by Dec. 1," Mike Arno, the contractor heading the signature-gathering effort, told The Times' Dan Morain.

He added that "people are still out working" and circulating petitions.

To qualify the measure, its supporters must obtain signatures from 434,000 registered California voters. They say they have obtained roughly that number of names, but inevitably many will be disqualified when state officials vet the petitions, often because the signers are not registered to vote. So to ensure they reach the required mark, the initiative supporters aim to amass about 700,000 signatures.

The measure calls for California to change the winner-take-all method for its 55 electoral votes -- by far the nation's largest cache and more than one-fifth of the total needed to win the White House. Instead, the electoral votes would be apportioned based primarily on the outcome of the presidential race in each congressional district.

Virtually every other state uses the winner-take-all approach.

No Republican presidential candidate has carried California since Ronald Reagan in 1984 (correction alert: pardon us, that would be George H.W. Bush in 1988) and, in light of the state's strong Democratic tilt, few political analysts see that changing anytime soon. But Republicans now hold 19 of the state's 53 House seats, so presumably the next GOP nominee could emerge from California with at least some electoral votes.

Morain reports that the initiative's backers filed a campaign finance statement ...

late Tuesday showing they had garnered more than $500,000 in donations to their cause in recent weeks, pushing their total to about $1.2 million.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista) donated $50,000, raising his total contribution to $100,000.

The measure's main financial angel has been Paul Singer, who also is a major money man for Republican Rudy Giuliani's presidential bid. Other prominent Giuliani supporters are playing key roles in pushing the initiative, causing its opponents to file complaints with federal officials charging the Giuliani campaign with masterminding the measure.

That would be a violation of federal election law, and the Giuliani campaign has strongly and consistently denied the allegation.

With odds increasing that the initiative will qualify for the ballot, Chris Lehane, a San Francisco-based Democratic activist leading the campaign to derail it, issued the following statement today:

"The power-grabbers are pursuing a lose-lose-lose strategy: It will lose at the ballot box, where it is polling below 30%; it will be a loser for the Republican Party, as it will brand the GOP as the party of presidential hijackers; and it will be a loser for Rudy Giuliani, whose close connections to the initiative will only further define him as someone who puts the raw, crass pursuit of power before the best interests of the country."

The rhetoric hints at the intensity level -- within both parties -- that could surround the battle over the initiative, should it be placed before voters.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Rick]

Republicans stooping to low levels on this initiative, as they are getting homeless people to sign this scam..And then there's this:

"The allegations of petition fraud concern several independent contractors who tabled in the Arbor last Thursday and in front of the UCen on Wednesday, asking students to sign a petition to “help children with cancer.” Once students agreed to sign this petition, they were allegedly told to sign two or three additional papers for other unrelated initiatives without their knowledge."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/us/21calif.htm?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1195748182-79Q7vO1dYieAeCS1j8T5pA

http://www.dailynexus.com/article.php?a=15191

Besides, even if it were to make it to the ballot, there are serious constitutional issues with it, so it will wind up in the courts....

[Dr Coles]

We have to many anarchists and incompetents in government. California needs to flush the toilet. No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for.

[David York]

Bottom Line: Bush as Decider has kept us safe.

[jillian johansen]

These folks are subverting our Democratic process by playing "Dirty Tricks" with signature gathering.

Allegations of illegal activity by petitioners on campus has turned up inconsistencies in the signature-collection process and raised questions about the validity of the practices at the UCSB campus.

The voter-fraud accusations relate to several independent contractors who tabled in the Arbor yesterday and in front of the UCen on Wednesday, asking students to sign a petition to “help children with cancer.” Once students agreed to sign this petition, they were presented with two or three additional forms to sign. In varying incidents, these additional initiatives, all unrelated to the cancer measure, were sometimes poorly explained or not mentioned at all - a violation of state election code.

http://www.dailynexus.com/article.php?a=15152

[Ron Russell]

Perhaps we could get the backers of this garbage to agree that Texas, Georgia and South Carolina should also apportion a percentage of those states delegates according to the California plan? No, I didn't think so.

[FastMovingCloud]

This initiative should only be allowed if it will be implemented nationwide. The Republicans sure don't want that to happen because they might win California but they would lose nearly every other state in the union with this plan. Except Utah, of course.

[Jeff]

All states should be required to divide electoral votes based on results within each congressional district.

Instead of 1 vote against millions (i.e., a Democrat voting in Texas or a Republican voting in California) you would only be competing against other voters within your district.

This gives more power to the individual voter and erodes control of the large individual states (Florida, Texas, California, and New York).

Rural, Urban, and Suburban voters would all get a louder voice.

[Sharon F. Oda]

I agree with paper ballots and personally taking a photograph of my ballot. These people have no bottom.