Back in 1948, when most of America woke up the day after the presidential election and learned to its surprise that Harry Truman had defeated Thomas Dewey, California counted. It was only because of this state’s late-reporting vote that Truman won out.
But there was no suspense about California’s vote this month: the television networks called the state for Democrat Barack Obama the moment the polls closed.
In 1948, Truman whistle-stopped the state, speaking from the rear balcony of his campaign train in big cities and small towns like Madera, Turlock and Tulare. People saw their President in the flesh, something only a few wealthy Californians could do this year.
The outcome here was so certain this time – as it has been since 1992 – that neither Obama nor Republican Mitt Romney nor either of their vice presidential running mates held even one campaign rally in the Golden State. They came here only when their cash supplies began running short, essentially to recharge their wallets from the nation’s leading political ATM.
For votes they went to the “swing states,” with more than two-thirds of the last month’s candidate campaign appearances confined to just three states: Ohio, Florida and Virginia. There were occasional forays to exotic locales like Pennsylvania, Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, Nevada and Michigan, but not even many of those.
As for states like Texas, California and New York – three of nation’s four largest – forget about it. That’s because the outcomes in those states are foregone conclusions these days, so certain that candidates don’t even bother to advertise here.
California’s place in the Democratic column grew even more solid during this year, as the state’s Democrats registered several hundred thousand more voters during the fall than Republicans, who talked a lot about outreach, but did very little actual reaching. The state GOP sank below 30 percent of all registered voters for the first time ever, while Democrats moved up to about 44 percent, with most of the rest declaring no party preference.
It’s not that California votes mean little; it’s just that the preponderance go Democratic and everyone knows it in advance. So how to give California voters as much clout as folks in Ohio, who are pestered non-stop during election season, both in person and electronically?
It’s plain how to make the California presidential primary more important: Move it back up into early February, like it was four years ago when this state went pretty big for Hillary Clinton and almost deprived Obama of the Democratic nomination. By scheduling the most recent primary last June, state legislators almost completely deprived it of meaning.
The solution for the November general election, when there’s just one Election Day across the nation, is not so obvious, but there is one.
In fact, as recently as 2010, state lawmakers on a bipartisan basis demonstrated they understood what to do: They voted for something called the National Popular Vote initiative, a move sponsored by the then-chairmen of both the Republican and Democratic caucuses in the state Assembly.
This plan would lessen the emphasis on the Electoral College that causes candidates to concentrate their efforts on just a few swing states. It would also prevent situations like the George W. Bush vs. Albert Gore outcome of 2000, when Gore won half a million more votes nationally, only to lose the presidency in the Electoral College.
The idea is for states to pledge all their electoral votes to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote. The plan adopted by the Legislature in both 2009 and 2010 would have committed California to this, but not until 27 other states made the same commitment. So far, just seven have, mostly small states on the Eastern Seaboard, places like Rhode Island and Maryland, which – like California – get no attention from presidential candidates.
This plan would make an extra vote in heavily Democratic San Francisco or Los Angeles or heavily Republican Madera and Orange counties count as much as one in Kent, Ohio – not the case today. This would force candidates to campaign everywhere, something presidential aspirants did as recently as 1970, when Republican Richard Nixon visited 49 states and Democratic rival George McGovern went to 48.
Put all voters everywhere on an equal basis, and candidates would have to spend time in the most populous places rather than merely chase electoral votes. That means less big rallies and advertising in New Hampshire and Nevada and more here and in Illinois, Texas and New York. It means candidates would have to learn about California concerns.
All of which suggests it is high time for a National Popular Vote plan revival in Sacramento, and for Gov. Jerry Brown to sign it if and when it passes. That will be a big step toward restoring meaning to presidential politics in California.
Make California count again