Boxer: We must end this Electoral College on which I relied to challenge the 2004 election


Ed Morrissey:

What happens when a constitutional provision that has existed since the founding of the present American government works as designed? The losers demand an end to it. Outgoing Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer has introduced a bill in the lame-duck session to put an end to the Electoral College, about as threadbare a publicity stunt as, well … her reliance on the Electoral College in another 2004 post-election stunt:

It’s been an extremely divisive election, and a lot of people this year are having trouble accepting the outcome. Some — like California Sen. Barbara Boxer — have argued in the wake of the results that it’s time to get rid of the current system altogether.

The Democrat introduced legislation Tuesday that would abolish the Electoral College and use the popular vote instead to determine the presidency. She has public opinion behind her. According to a 2013 Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans would get rid of the electoral college.

“This is the only office in the land where you can get more votes and still lose the presidency,” Boxer said in a statement. “The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately.”

This is a lame PR stunt for a couple of reasons to which we’ll return in a moment, but it’s also a stunningly hypocritical stance for Barbara Boxer. She infamously challenged Ohio’s slate of electors in January 2005 in an attempt to block (or at least stall) George W. Bush’s formal re-election process. Bush had won the popular vote by over 3 million over John Kerry, but needed Ohio to get over the 270 electors needed to complete his victory in the Electoral College. Boxer claimed that voting irregularities had taken place in Ohio, most of which turned out to be the same kind of “fake news” nonsense that the media has suddenly discovered twelve years later as a threat to the Republic. Boxer wasn’t interested in relying on the popular vote in that case — she explicitly relied on the Electoral College for her challenge.

It’s also lame because this Congress has no incentive to advance that agenda anyway. Granted, the Senate could pass the bill if it wanted to do so, but they will be more occupied with an upcoming budget deadline than Boxer’s grandiosity in service to a narrow number of states who would back this constitutional amendment. She would need a two-thirds supermajority in both the Senate and the House just to send it off to the states for ratification. The odds of that happening are somewhere between slim and none, and don’t take slim even with the spread.

But let’s say Boxer can get two-thirds of the Senate to forget that the US is a constitutional republic rather than a pure democracy. Which of these states will jump on board for a two-thirds ratification that allows high-population states like California, New York, and Massachusetts choose presidents in every cycle?

Try to pick 38 states that want to give up any influence they have as political entities in order to sign up for domination by the coastal elites. Democrats only won 20 states last week in the Electoral College, and in Congressional and state legislative races fewer than that. Florida and Texas might throw in theoretically, given their large populations, but that still leaves 16 more states to woo.

The truth is that the Electoral College worked exactly as designed.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Boxer,Feinstein,Schumer and reid all of them should retire and leave america and take the Obamas and the Clintons and Gores with them

Boxer claimed that voting irregularities had taken place in Ohio

Of course there were “irregularities” (aka vote fraud). Most “voting irregularities” are done by Democrats to steal elections. Democrats need these “irregularities” to win because they purged the party of most of it’s moderates and shoved their party drastically to the radical far left. Independent voters do not generally support radicals of either extreme political wing.