10/12   What is the election is close enough that the Colorado initiative
        to split their electoral votes decides the election? Which way
        would the USSC rule?
        \_ USSC is pwned by Bush/Cheney.  I think it would pretty much be a
           foregone conclusion.  That said, I think the scenario (Bush wins
           Colorado && initiative passes) is pretty unlikely.
        \_ On the basis of historical precedent, states have been allowed to
           choose how they allocate electoral votes, but I'd count on this
           court to cook up some argument to throw it out.
           \_ The US Constitution allows the state legislature to choose the
              method for allocating electoral votes.  The CO initiative
              bypasses the legislature and IMO should be ruled
              unconstitutional.
              \_ This really is the key issue here.  Under the Const.
                 the legislature has manifest power over how electors are
                 chosen.  Even if it passes it won't take effect for this
                 election because of legal contests.
              \_ Well, it obviously allows the legislatures to defer that
                 responsibility to the voters.
                 \_ Show me anything in Article II Section 1 that "obviously"
                    says that.
                    \_ OK, why do the states let popular vote decide who gets
                       the electors?
                       \_ That's how the legislatures wrote their state laws.
                          Some states already split electoral votes based on
                          popular vote.
        \_ Maine does it.  Why can't Colorado?  Is it a "If it passes, it
           shouldn't apply until the NEXT election" kind of issue?
           \_ Well the initiative is written so that it would apply to this
              election, so it's not like you could argue the voters are being
              tricked.
              \_ Who is saying the voters are being tricked?
                 I'm talking about the candidates having the rules "change"
                 on them during the election, and perhaps this being "illegal".
                 \_ Responding to myself:  Okay, the earlier thread makes
                    sense.  The question is, does legislature == the people or
                    legislature != the people, for the purposes of
                    USC Article II Section 1 on apportioning electoral votes.
                    \_ I don't see why you can't have a state constitutional
                       amendment saying "the legislature shall do such-and-
                       such..."
                       \_ It would be pretty funny if the USSC wrote something
                          like, "the spirit of the electoral college was to
                          prevent the tyranny of the masses, so legislature !=
                          the people in this case".
                          \_ Why would this be funny?  We're a republic, not a
                             democracy.
                             \_ We're whatever is required to most benefit the
                                dominant party, which at the moment happens to
                                be the Republicans.
                             \_ It would be funny because the people might end
                                up pissed.  This is independent of the intent
                                of the framers of the Constitution.  Duh.