Sacramento Bee uncritically reported GOP's claims about effects of CA ballot initiative

Written by Matt Gertz

Published

In reporting on a Republican-backed California ballot initiative that would award the state's electoral votes by congressional district, The Sacramento Bee stated that “Republicans behind the initiative said it would force presidential candidates to visit California more often and give more voters a voice in the presidential outcome.” But the Bee did not note that there are only three congressional districts in California that Sen. John Kerry or President Bush carried by 5 percentage points or less during the 2004 presidential election; thus, if the initiative passed, campaigns would presumably have little incentive to “visit California more often,” as the initiative's backers reportedly claimed. Moreover, California voters would have less influence on the outcome of elections, because voters would likely deliver fewer than the current 55 electoral votes to the winner.

In a December 4 article on the controversial Republican-backed California ballot initiative that would award the state's electoral votes by congressional district, The Sacramento Bee reported that “Republicans behind the initiative said it would force presidential candidates to visit California more often and give more voters a voice in the presidential outcome.” But the Bee did not note, as Media Matters for America has documented, that there are only three congressional districts in California that Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) or President Bush carried by 5 percentage points or less during the 2004 presidential election; thus, if the initiative passed, campaigns would presumably have little incentive to “visit California more often,” as the initiative's backers reportedly claimed. Further, the article did not report that the measure would also give California voters less influence on the outcome of national elections because it would make it virtually impossible for the state to award 55 electoral votes to its winner, as it does under the current winner-take-all system.

According to a Media Matters analysis of data from The Almanac of American Politics, published by the nonpartisan National Journal Group, only three California congressional districts were carried by 5 percentage points or less in 2004, providing presidential candidates little reason to campaign throughout the state if electors were chosen by district rather than statewide. Contrary to the claim reportedly made by the measure's supporters, it would thus make little sense for a presidential candidate “to visit California more often” since the state would offer as few potentially competitive electoral votes as Wyoming or Delaware, instead of campaigning in “swing” states such as Ohio (20 electoral votes) or Florida (27 electoral votes).

Indeed, as San Francisco Chronicle editorial page editor John Diaz wrote in a September 9 column:

So clear is the partisan bent of these districts -- by design, with the assistance of sophisticated computer modeling -- that it's hard to imagine that more than a few would truly be up for grabs in any presidential election.

In reality, if California were to apportion electors by congressional district, its current prize of 55 electoral votes suddenly would be diminished to a competition for perhaps five electors (equivalent to Idaho or West Virginia) at the most.

Further, as Media Matters also noted, under the GOP plan, California voters would actually have less influence on the outcome of national elections. Under the state's current winner-take-all system, California awards 55 electoral votes to its winner, far more than any other state. Under the GOP plan, it would be essentially impossible for the winner of California to gain 55 electoral votes. Indeed, if this plan had been in effect in 2004, California would have awarded Kerry 33 electoral votes and Bush 22 votes. Rather than providing a margin of 55 electoral votes to its winner, California would have provided an 11-vote margin -- reducing California's clout to that of Indiana.

From the December 4 Sacramento Bee article:

Republican political consultant Dave Gilliard, who is spearheading the Electoral College initiative effort, has insisted for the past month that local elections officials could speed up the random counting process so the initiative could qualify for the June election by a Jan. 24 state deadline.

But such an assumption may be unreasonable because county registrars already have committed workers to prepare for the Feb. 5 election, said Stephen Weir, registrar of voters in Contra Costa County and president of the California Association of Clerks and Election Officials.

Counties are slammed with duties that include mailing ballots to overseas voters, preparing ballot guides, training poll workers and gearing up for absentee voting that begins Jan. 7. At the same time, many county election offices are juggling staff vacation time around the holidays.

“They're risking it, honestly,” Weir said of Gilliard's initiative effort. “They're risking it. They're up against a tidal wave of programming. ... You can't miss deadlines when you have a live election going.”

Democrats have charged that the initiative is a ploy to ensure Republicans obtain 20 or more electoral votes in California, a state no GOP presidential candidate has won since George H.W. Bush in 1988. But Republicans behind the initiative said it would force presidential candidates to visit California more often and give more voters a voice in the presidential outcome.

Gilliard and other GOP consultants took over the initiative drive in late October after earlier proponents abandoned the proposal due to a lack of funding and a questionable donation received from a Rudy Giuliani supporter.