2004 Ballot Proposal for the State of Colorado
Amendment 36: Selection of Presidential Electors

…creating procedures for allocating Colorado's electoral votes for president and vice-president of the United States, based on the proportion of ballots that are cast in this state for each presidential ticket; making the terms of the proposed amendment effective so that popular proportional selection of presidential electors applies to the 2004 general election…

In other words (Colorado Blue Book):

The proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution:

• eliminates the current system in which the presidential candidate receiving the most votes gets all of the state's electoral votes;
• allocates Colorado's electoral votes based on the percentages of votes for each presidential candidate; and
• makes the changes effective for the November 2004 presidential election.

If I hear another fucker say that this amendment, if passed, could turn Colorado into the Florida of 2004 I'm going to FedEx 'em a package of my still-steaming feces. Here's the scenario I keep hearing about:

Let's pretend this ballot passes (I predict it will not, which makes this post pointless… but whatever). Let's also pretended that Dubya wins the majority of popular votes in Colorado by a slim margin (which he more than likely will). This gives Dubya 5 electoral votes and John/John 4, instead of giving all 9 to Dubya. Let us keep pretending. Pretend that John/John wins the presidential election by 2 electoral votes. In this crazy world of speculative make-believe, if the citizens of Colorado hadn't passed Amendment 36 then Dubya would've taken the majority of the electoral college. Follow? Good. So now, Dubya is pissed at Colorado and unleashes his hive of lawyers to swarm Colorado and challenge the constitutionality of Colorado Amendment 36. The ensuing court battle is ugly, messy, and long. No matter what the courts decide the next president will have an ugly shadow of doubt cast over the next 4-years.

What a ridiculous reason to vote against this ballot; and, this is one of the oppositions main arguments. Allow me to distill the argument: Vote "NO" on Amendment 36, because it might cause political trouble and we don't want Colorado to be perceived as a crazy problem child. Lame.

There are other reasons to vote against this proposed amendment, like Colorado losing political relevance. For now, Colorado is considered a minor swing state. Ignoring third-parties, we traditionally split 52-48% in favor of the Republican candidates. This margin is close enough to land the big CO a smorgasbord of visits from the Dubya camp and the John/John group. Colorado is so damn lucky to have the Prez and his opposition bless us with their honorable stump-thumping… or whatever the hell the proper word is for "spewing pointless campaign slogans that don't tell me shit about how you're going so make this country better." If Amendment 36 is passed and Colorado's political views remain constant then Colorado might net future presidential candidates one or two electoral votes over the opposition. This makes Colorado less politically significant than Wyoming. Ouch.

I'm going to try and quantify how much political significance Colorado will lose if Amendment 36 passes (which it won't). Obviously, every 4-years Colorado will see less stump-humping. I'm okay with that; it's time to stop the sexual molestation of dead trees everywhere. Besides, every time the oh-so-important president visits my city traffic gets all loco because the authorities close off roads and turn all the lights green for the presidential caravan.

As a consequence of diminished political pull, Colorado also might lose a bit of push when it comes to regional issues like water rights, renewable resources, environmental conservation, medical marijuana, and other hippie crap. The president may not eat out such issues if Colorado won't help him win the next election. But isn't that why we have senators and representatives? The congressional branch exists to make sure each state has a voice fitting its statehood and population. I really can't see Amendment 36 totally undermining Colorado's regional issues.

These silly and empty alarmist con arguments are getting me personally worked up over this Amendment (that will not pass). If somebody --anybody-- could give me significant and specific ramification regarding why I should vote "NO" on my ballot then hit me, otherwise I'm voting "YES". I will not accept arguments about backing down 'cause the fallout might suck. I will not accept arguments that vaguely hint at some uncalculated loss of political power. I will not accept arguments regarding historic preservation of the current democratic-republic system 'cause god forbid we ever change anything that might be outdated.

And here's why I'm voting "YES": To support third parties. No third party has ever won a single electoral college vote, because no third part has ever carried the majority of a state, which is the only way a third party could ever gain actual electoral votes. With Amendment 36 approved, a third party could actually take an electoral vote. All the third party would need to do is win approximately 12% of Colorado's popular vote. One electoral vote isn't enough to change the country, but it's a start. Maybe someday, in the far distant future of hemp-fueled hovercars and Jedi Knights, we can toss a couple electoral votes to a third party… preferably the Libertarians.
...and so it was written, shenry at 10/26/2004 02:03:00 PM.
...and so it was appended with .