[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Frank D. Russo

With the Wednesday April 2 deadline to file to run to be an Obama or Clinton delegate to the Democratic National Convention still a week away, a record number of Californians have already applied. On Sunday, April 13 at 3 p.m., each of the two remaining Democratic candidates for President will hold caucuses in Congressional Districts throughout the state and elect 241 delegates. There is a later election of “At-Large” delegates, and of course a number of “super delegates,” but this is the way most of California’s delegates will be elected.

According to Bob Mulholland, campaign adviser for the California Democratic Party, well over 2350 people have already applied to run.

Mulholland was excited. He exclaimed yesterday when I saw him in Sacramento: “Only 241 slots! This is a record. It’s unbelievable, the interest and people in California who want to be a delegate to the national convention. We’re overwhelmed with all the paperwork.”

He noted, “Before we had 1200 to 1300 or so—and that was when we had all the candidates holding caucuses. This is the first time we are holding the caucuses after the primary. So we’re only having caucuses for the two candidates that count—the ones that won.”

by David Dayen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Frank D. Russo

On the Sunday after Super Tuesday, we know that California broke records. We had the highest number of voters ever going to the polls in our state’s history in a Presidential primary—or any primary election for that matter. We also had more votes cast in our primary than any other state in the nation. Of course, we have more voters and more population than any other state.

But there still are well over a million votes, probably about 1.5 million votes that remain to be counted. While these will not change the winner of the statewide vote, these ballots could very well affect the numbers of delegates awarded to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, especially in the local delegates elected in Congressional Districts.

Estimates from the Secretary of State’s office are that 9.1 million Californians voted, but the totals so far that we can see are 7.7 million.

by David Dayen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

Arnold Schwarzenegger's official call for a special session covered the topics of health care and water, but not redistricting, as was suspected earlier.  So, with no bill coming from the legislature yesterday either, redistricting is apparently dead for this legislative session.  The major players appeared to agree on the broad principles of a reform, but the devil was in the details, specifically the makeup of the independent redistricting commission and whether Congressional districts should be included in that redistricting (Nancy Pelosi says a big no to that one).  Dan Walters explains how this proposal's absence from the February ballot may impact the other major initiative on it:

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Dr. John R. KozaCo-author of Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote

The ballot measure to divide California’s 55 electoral votes by congressional district would magnify the worst features of our antiquated Electoral College system of electing the President.

If the district approach were used nationally, it would less accurately reflect the will of the people than the current system. In 2004, Bush won 50.7% of the popular vote, but 59% of the districts. Although Bush lost the national popular vote in 2000, he won 55% of the country’s congressional districts. If the district approach were unilaterally impose on an isolated large state such as California, it would greatly increase the chance that the White House would go to a candidate who did not win the most popular votes nationwide.

The district approach would not, as claimed, make California relevant in presidential elections. Candidates have no reason to campaign in districts (or states) where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. Currently, candidates concentrate over two-thirds of their money and visits on just six closely divided “battleground” states, and 99% of their expenditures in just 16 states. Thus, two thirds of the states are ignored in presidential elections.

by David Dayen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

Take that!
 
Just a few days after Republicans filed an initiative to steal California's electoral votes by splitting them by Congressional districts, key Democrats fired back by filing two new initiatives with the Attorney General aimed at presenting Californians with real electoral college reforms.
 
The initiatives, which would enact a national popular vote system, would represent real and fair reform of the process used to elect the president of the United States, according to their sponsors.

"The Republican proposal is the wrong reform at the wrong time and in the wrong place," said business leader Tom Steyer in a press release. "They want to divide California's 55 electoral votes by Congressional District, taking the existing complicated and flawed system and making it even more complicated and more flawed," he added. "Not a single prominent Democrat supports the Republican proposal because it is unfair and partisan attempt to rig the system -- and that is why we are promoting a fair election reform that is based on the national popular vote."
 
Electing our President by a national popular vote is a goal supported by an overwhelming majority of Californians. The winner of virtually every other office in the U.S. is the candidate with the most votes. The most important election in the world, the Presidency, should also be based on the principle of one person, one vote.

There's more...