Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

worldwide drugstorepremarin with worldwide shipping valtrex canadaand Im buy in online pharmacy and bactrim generic and clomid new zealand no rx.viagra australia without prescription. And you can order propecia best of medications arimidex
Jon Fleischman

Walters & Golisano — California Republicans: Nowhere To Go But Up

[Publisher’s Note:  We are pleased to present this column on the National Popular Vote issue for your consumption.  I interviewed one of the authors of this column, Tom Golisano, back in March.  You can see that video here – Flash]

California Republicans: Nowhere To Go But Up
By State Senator Mimi Walters and Tom Golisano

November 2010 turned out to be a monumental success for Republicans throughout the nation and a dismal failure for the California GOP.  While Republicans shocked the nation by winning 63 congressional seats and easily winning back control of the United States Congress; we lost every single statewide Constitutional office in California, something that we’ve only managed to do a couple times since becoming a state.

You do not need to look far to understand why California has gone from a purple state in the ‘80s to a blue state getting even bluer each year.  As the unions, their members, and their dues grow, the number of Republican volunteers dwindles and our infrastructure crumbles.  As California’s Republican donors contribute well in excess of $50 million each presidential election cycle to build solid Republican infrastructures in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, California’s Republican infrastructure is on life-support.

Some pessimists say that it will be several decades before California Republicans are able to reverse this trend.  However, these pessimists have not considered a current effort underway to restructure the way in which presidential campaigns are conducted – thereby resuscitating the California Republican Party.

While, to some Republicans, the title “National Popular Vote” might sound like something conjured-up by pot smoking hippies at Woodstock, the idea is reasonable and, quite frankly, the California Republican Party’s only remaining hope if it intends to resurrect itself during our lifetimes.

The concept is actually quite simple.  Instead of appointing our state’s 55 electors based upon which presidential candidate wins California’s popular vote, we appoint them based upon which candidate wins the nation’s popular vote.  This small adjustment in the way we select our members of the Electoral College will make a dramatic difference in the way presidential campaigns are conducted.  Due to our population, Presidential candidates of both political parties will be forced to pay attention to voters in California.  No longer will California be simply the ATM at which presidential candidates stop on their way to and from campaigning in important battleground states.  For once, we might actually see our state’s important issues addressed.  Our Central Valley would not be forced to deal with a Congress-made “dust bowl” and we might actually see a resolution to our illegal immigration stand-off.

Because presidential candidates will be forced to campaign in our state, campaign funds raised here will actually be used to rebuild California’s Republican Party infrastructure.  With a rebuilt infrastructure, Republicans will once again be competitive.

Some detractors, such as Tara Ross, a Texas author who studies the Electoral College, claim that National Popular Vote’s constitutionality is questionable because it would eliminate the Electoral College, when in fact NPV only adjusts the way in which electors are selected and its function is entirely dependent upon the existence of the Electoral College.

Others naively claim that National Popular Vote would lead to the influx of hundreds of millions of Democrat dollars into Los Angeles and San Francisco, which they say would spike Democrat turn-out in those urban areas.  Of course, that assumes that the hundreds of millions of union dollars that have been spent on political campaigns in the past couple years and tens of thousands of union workers that have turned-out Democrat voters have had no effect on our elections.  This argument fails to take into consideration the fact that media prices in urban areas such as Los Angeles and San Francisco are the most expensive in the world and generate the smallest return on the investment.  Let’s call it a surtax on liberal votes.  On the other hand, Republican voters tend to live in suburban and rural areas of the state where media prices are dramatically less costly.  In other words, Republicans will be able to turn-out more voters for less money.

In order for Republicans in California to once again be viable, we must rebuild our infrastructure, reinvigorate our grassroots, and reinvest the dollars from California donors back into California.  National Popular Vote is not the complete solution, but at a minimum, it will get our Party moving in the right direction.

_________________________________________________________

Mimi Walters is a California State Senator representing Orange County.  Tom Golisano is a philanthropist, entrepreneur, and registered Republican.

7 Responses to “Walters & Golisano — California Republicans: Nowhere To Go But Up”

  1. Robert Bosich Says:

    The Demo turn out the vote crowd will Capone Republicans…getting out “votes” is their forte!

    These purification articles are milk toast “True Confessions”. LETS MOVE ON..

  2. Gene Brouillette Says:

    To say the infrastructure needs to be rebuilt, I believe to be a continuing error made by our republican leadership. Republican leadership has given us little reason to be excited and supportive of the party. Constant caving and compromise have led the party to insignificance.

    I belive a return to principal will generate the enthusiasm and support you so sorely need.

  3. Didacus Says:

    I don’t see how NPV builds GOP infrastructure. The GOP brand in California is very strong among the most conservative socially and economically in the state. We stick to our principles on taxes and social issues. But we have nothing in our plank that appeals to anyone beyond our hard-core 28%. We need to have our solid core and then have some ideas that can bring in the swing voters.

    Priciniples are important but if those principles are only appealing to a narrow minority we will never get to ac on them and we become a wacky fringe party like the Greens or Peace and Freedom. They stick to their principles and never win.

    We new ideas – ones that are more California specific not re-runs of what sells in the Deep South (which California is nothing like).

  4. California » Blog Archive » California moves toward popular-vote president – Total Buzz Says:

    […] in this co-written article, disputes del Beccaro’s analysis, that she says “assumes that a hundreds of millions of kinship […]

  5. California » Blog Archive » California moves toward popular-vote president Says:

    […] in this co-written article, disputes del Beccaro’s analysis, that she says “assumes that a hundreds of millions of kinship […]

  6. State Senate approves ‘popular-vote president’ - Total Buzz - The Orange County Register Says:

    […] in this co-written article, disputes del Beccaro’s analysis, which she says “assumes that the hundreds of millions […]

  7. State Senate approves ‘popular-vote president’ - Total Buzz - The Orange County Register Says:

    […] in this co-written article released before she changed possitions, disputed del Beccaro’s analysis, which she said […]