By John Lyon
Arkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK — A bill calling for Arkansas to join a movement to do away with the Electoral College system received the endorsement Wednesday of a legislative panel.
In what was nearly a party-line vote, the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs recommended House Bill 1339 by Monty Davenport, D-Yellville. Under the bill, Arkansas would join a group of states that support giving the presidency to the candidate who wins the popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey and Maryland have passed similar measures. The bill would only take effect after enough states have joined the movement to control a majority of electoral votes, or 270 of 538.
The committee voted 12-6 to endorse the measure. Only one Republican, Rep. Andrea Lea, R-Russellville, voted for the bill. All 10 Democrats on the committee voted for it.
The bill advances to the full House.
Christopher Pearson of Burlington, Vt., an organizer with National Popular Vote, testified that a December 2008 poll commissioned by his group found that 80 percent of Arkansas voters believe the candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states should become president.
Pearson said that under the Electoral College system, states like Vermont and Arkansas are largely ignored by political candidates because they are not battleground states. A popular vote system would make every vote count and make every vote equal, he said.
“If every vote is equal, there is no reason to dismiss anybody,” Pearson said.
Rep. Davy Carter, R-Cabot, said Arkansas’ impact on choosing a president is greater under the Electoral College system than it would be under a popular vote system. He said he doubted candidates would give more attention to Arkansas if the Electoral College were abolished.
Carter said the state does enjoy “a slight mathematical advantage” under the present system, but candidates would spend more time and money in the state if every vote mattered.
Rep. Ann Clemmer, R-Benton, said a lack of understanding of the Electoral College system may explain popular sentiment against it.
“Most people don’t like anything they don’t understand,” she said.
Mary Schroeder of Bigelow, a board member for the conservative group Eagle Forum, urged the panel to reject the bill.
“We believe it’s going to take Arkansas out of the picture,” she said.
February 5th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Last year, Nebraska (5 electors) was a battleground state. Barack Obama campaigned in the urban Omaha congressional district. The “Red” state split 4-1. Obama was nominated with the D’s district plan for delegate selection. Every state with a District Plan is a battleground state.
Most people object to voting in a minority of the state and their vote being erased in the state-made unit rule, winner take all. But that is not the Electoral College, that is the fault of the states.
There have been twelve states with the District Plan. They ended with 19th Century political machines overwhelming the geographic, ethnic or economic diversity allowed with the District Plan: one elector from each congressional district, and a two-elector bonus for the state majority.
Votes in different states are unequal, different in registration, counting, fraud and appeals. Let the differences inside each state be expressed, and let their expression stand.
There is no General Will in a democratic republic which requires each individual and community to give up their individuality. Let states of equal population have the same weight electing the President of the United States.