On October 3, the California Republican Party submitted its 55 candidates for presidential elector, pledged to Donald Trump. This list is from the Republican Party’s web page.
Earlier, the American Independent Party submitted its list of presidential elector candidates. They are also pledged to Donald Trump. Only two names are on both lists: Ron Gold and Thomas Hudson. The Secretary of State accepted the filings for all 108 individual elector candidates.
Donald Trump’s name is on the November California ballot as “Donald J. Trump, Republican, American Independent.” There is only one space on the ballot to vote for Trump. Therefore, all votes cast in that one space for Trump are overvotes, because they are casting a vote for 108 elector candidates. No California voter is permitted to vote for more than 55 candidates for presidential elector. When a voter casts a vote for more candidates than are to be elected, that is an “overvote” and the vote is invalid.
Section 6902 of the California election code says, “At the general election in each leap year, there shall be chosen by the voters of the state as many electors of President and Vice President as the state is then entitled to.” California is entitled to 55 electoral votes.
Section 15505 of the California election code says, “No later than the 32nd day following the election, the Secretary of State shall analyze the votes given for presidential electors, and certify to the Governor the names of the proper number of persons having the highest number of votes. The Secretary of State shall thereupon issue and transmit to each presidential elector a certificate of election.”
Section 14285 says, “The voter shall, by using the provided marking device, place a mark in the voting square, rectangle, or other specific voting space following the names of the candidates for that office for whom the voter intends to vote, not exceeding, however, the number of candidates to be elected.”
The California Secretary of State could have solved the problem of separate presidential elector lists for each of the two parties by placing Donald Trump’s name on the ballot twice, once for each party. Because this was not done, the only two Trump electors whose vote total can be ascertained are Ron Gold and Thomas Hudson. And even votes cast for them will be invalid, because all Trump popular votes will be overvotes.
Could voters write Trump in and specify which party’s slate of electors they prefer? Or is that avenue blocked too?
(If this becomes widely known, could it potentially make Californians who are voting for Trump just to stop Clinton — or vice versa — feel more free to vote their real preferences for Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, or Gloria LaRiva?)
Gee — will the LUNATIC Trump now rave 24/7 that the ENTIRE election system is EVIL, CORRUPT and RIGGED even more than he has been doing ???
i.e. to get his 2nd Amdt army to do whatever on Election Day night ???
—-
Abolish the SUPER SUPER time bomb Electoral College.
Uniform definition of Elector-Voter in ALL of the USA.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
It just goes to show you, the majors screw up ballot access as much as anyone else. But, somehow, this will all be magically fixed by election day.
Section 6902 of the California election code says, “At the general election in each leap year, there shall be chosen by the voters of the state as many electors of President and Vice President as the state is then entitled to.”
So what the hell will happen in the year 2100 when there will be a general election but it WONT be a leap year? Will they call off the election, will it be anything goes, why even reference leap years
Maybe some of the 108 presidential elector candidates will withdraw before the election. That seems to be the easiest fix.
Is this a case of Trump being intentionally sabotaged, or is this just a screw up?
If they were going to be strict about it, overvotes are spoiled ballots and shouldn’t be counted at all. 0 popular votes for Trump in California.
The AIP tried to work out a slate and the GOP rebuffed them. If I were them I wouldn’t cooperate with anything. Presumably if it can cause problems for the certification of what will be Clinton electors I don’t know why either group would be against that. I don’t see anybody who can resolve this legally to have motivation to do so and every possible outcome would leave somebody with a motivation to fight it in court.
“The suspense is terrible. I hope it’ll last.”
They list former Congressman Virgil Goode of Virginia. I thought all of the CA electors had to be residents of California???
QUESTION FOR RICHARD—
Can the SOS properly certify the CA vote when there is not a set of properly named electors?
The real question is how can the Secretary of the State tell the Governor which presidential candidates are elected, in case Trump gets the most votes? How will the Secretary of State know which 55 presidential candidates have been elected, when the election returns will show that all 108 received the same number of popular votes?
There is no California law saying the presidential elector candidates must be residents of California. Oddly enough, though, there is a law saying the alternates must be California residents.
I have to wonder if the timeline was reversed, with the GOP turning theirs in first, would the CA SOS have allowed the AIP to also submit theirs?
The answer doesn’t really matter because this will be fixed within the month.
Just as the distraction, with the state of Minnesota.
Padilla has not looked at Elections Code 13205 and 13210.
The instructions on the ballot for President say “Vote for One Party” (EC 13210(b)).
Further the instructions state the ballots should include “To vote for all of the electors of a party, stamp a cross (+) in the square opposite the names of the presidential and vice presidential candidates of that party. A cross (+) stamped in the square opposite the name of a party and its presidential and vice presidential candidate, is a vote for all of the electors of that party, but for no other candidates.” (EC 13205(b)) My emphasis.
Incidentally, the San Francisco ballots do not include this latter instruction, at least on sample ballots.
The California presidential election should be enjoined until new ballots can be printed.
Very good point, Jim. Thank you.
… That’s odd, where’s Mark Seidenberg? He usually comments on AIP-related stuff here.
I would recommend that some California Republican voters sue the Secretary of State (and the California Republican Party and California AIP, if necessary) for creating such a situation.
So what if the AIP had chosen Clinton as their nominee? Could they then have proposed their own slate of electors (different than the slate from Democrats)? This would have ensured that Trump would win CA’s electoral votes?
Stephen, only if the California Democratic Party failed, as the CA GOP did, to cooperate with the AIP on creating a slate of electors AND CA SOS Alex Padilla made the exact same blunders in the same manner. The AIP may have made the situation possible, but they did nothing that ensured these problems would arise from it. Padilla’s bungling was not under the control of the AIP.
Cody Quirk,
I did not want to comment until I did research on the history related to Article XIV, Section 2 of the United
States Constitution and the ejection of the entire California representation in the U.S. House of Representives.
First, declaring a seat vacant in Congress has only happened once in history and that was in 1803. Representive Johasses Petrus Van Ness was ejected
from the House of Representatives on January 17, 1803.
Now we face the prospect we will lose in California 53 seats in Congress from California because California
electors did not get to vote for 55 electors in either the
Republican Party slate or the American Independent Party slate to these statewide offices of profit of the State of California if they selected the ticket of Trump/Pence.
See: Julia King, GEORGE HADFIELD: Architect of the
Federal City (Ashgate: Burlngton, VT 2014).
This is all so confusing and so frustrating! I’ve only just read about how the electoral votes work in CA and the GOP not working with the AIP. I feel like the SOS was laughing to him/herself when the GOP list was submitted knowing full well that gave it to Hillary. WTH! I’m so infuriated right now. It’s so not fair that we go out to vote and it gets pissed away! What’s the point? Why should I bother to care then anymore? One person. One vote. Period. This is a bunch of crap. And knowing that this could have been prevented makes me even more angry. Ugh!
Can anyone tell me something. What if we right in his name? Does that make a difference?
Write in the name. If it is a write in, it HAS to be counted