When the Orange County Lincoln Club endorsed the CalCounts Initiative, you knew it was only a matter of days before the big shoe would drop – a major contribution towards qualification. This is because the Lincoln Club has a long tradition of not just talking, but DOING. If you look back over the history of the Orange County Lincoln Club, you will see that they have spent a generation being at the forefront of great things. Of course, the other shoe was a six-figure one — a six figure check…
It’s actually worth taking a few minutes to read this great profile of the O.C. Lincoln Club penned by FR Blogger/OC Blog Proprietor Matt Cunningham for Red County Magazine.
We reached out to FR friend Rich Wagner, the President of the Lincoln Club, and asked him if he would put pen to paper (or more likely fingers to keyboard) and share with our readers why his organization, which is quite selective about which battles it chooses to wage, has weighed in to give the CalCounts Initiative a huge push towards qualification…
LEADING A MOVEMENT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE
Richard K. Wagner, President, Lincoln Club of Orange County
The Lincoln Club of Orange County Board of Directors has voted decisively to endorse and support the California Counts Electoral College Reform initiative. Agreeing to contribute $100,000 to the cause, the Board felt that for far too long, too many voters in California have not been counted in Presidential elections.
For over 45 years the Lincoln Club has been at the forefront of most of the major issues confronting California. It was initial support and funding of club members that helped launch Ronald Reagan’s 1966 gubernatorial campaign. In 1978 early seed money and support by the club helped allow for Proposition 13 to proceed to the ballot. In 2003 it was a $200,000 commitment along with the club’s good name that helped to launch the recall of Gray Davis. In most instances, the club acted only after substantial, and sometimes heated, debate, and this vote was no exception.
The greatest cause for concern by some club members was the idea of reforming the Electoral College process in California. Taking the state from a winner-take-all to one where electors are chosen by Congressional district caused great angst. In fact only a month ago most board members were against this initiative for just this reason. However the debate established some solid arguments as to why this initiative should be considered and supported, and the reasons had nothing to do with trickery or slight of hand with regards to the election process.
First, California is an aberration in relation to the rest of the country. There are 38 million people in the state of which 22 million are eligible to vote, and around 15 million are actually registered. About 43% or 6.5 million of these are Democrats, and about 36% or 5.5 million of these are Republicans. In a winner-take-all scenario, 5 to 6 million Republican votes in the nation’s largest state are as good as uncounted in every Presidential election, and this greatly bothered the board.
Second, most candidates for President do not campaign in the state for votes and simply use it for raising money. By establishing a process whereby electors are chosen by Congressional district, California then sets itself up as a number of states within a state, thus forcing candidates to spend time here. For example, Orange County incorporates roughly five Congressional districts, or as many Electoral College votes as West Virginia. In effect, Orange County becomes a state, as does San Diego, L.A., the Inland Empire area of San Bernardino/Riverside, the Central Valley, and the Bay area.
Third, the idea that all states will follow suit and begin diluting down the effect of the Electoral College doesn’t make sense. Why would West Virginia, with only five Electoral College votes, make itself less attractive by not having a winner-take-all process? The idea of a winner-take-all process was not something board members had a problem with. It just seemed that in the mega-nation state of California, it no longer makes sense.
Fourth, the Founding Fathers, in framing the Constitution, were specific that the states, not the federal government, could each individually determine how their respective Electoral College votes would be apportioned. Club members felt that this in and of itself was a built-in check and balance on the Electoral College process, whereby a state has the ability to adjust and change as required to ensure the proper representation of its voters. This is a Federalist approach, and the Lincoln Club believes that the time to adjust has arrived.
Fifth, and last, one of the prominent ideas behind the formation of the Electoral College was to level the playing field between states so that the larger states would not be able to impose their will time and again over the smaller states. The situation we find ourselves in today is that a few extremely large states in the winner-take-all column are having a greater impact on elections than ever before. Club members felt that the Founding Fathers would be aghast at the size and influence of just a small number of states, and that they would be in support of the kind of political readjustment that the California Counts initiative proposes.
The Lincoln Club believes that California is just too big for a winner-take-all process, and that the California Counts initiative solves the representation problem without compromising the integrity of the Electoral College process. We think that the Founding Fathers would approve of this initiative – one that makes votes count.
[Publisher’s Note: A couple of action items for you, now that you’ve read Rich’s column… Click on the CalCounts Initiative Advertisement above, and get involed — and click on the Lincoln Club’s ad to the right and check it out! – Flash]
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.