the people of california the same way the case came to the california supreme court. on review from a decision from the california court of appeals, a lower tribunal. the california electorate disagreed respectfully with their supreme court at a 4-3 decision and reversed it. the crawford case, i would submit to you, judge hawkins, is on the point of this. that was another case where the california courts had interpreted the california constitution, i believe it was, the california constitution that they had interpreted to go beyond what the federal constitution requires. the people of california decided we're going to bring it back to the place that is required by the federal constitution, and the court said in a state like california, where the people retain the ultimate power of the government -- >> of course, generally, you can amend the constitution. that's true. it depends on the subject and what you're amending. i think that's what judge hawkins was talking about earlier. what is it that you are amending, and can you amend that? nobody had suggested you can't amend the california constitution no matter how the court had interpreted it, as a general rule. the question

the remaining states, ohio, illinois, california and texas. well, he had the home state advantage in california. and although the democrats did make an effort in california, i don't think the kennedy campaign electoral map ever really thought that california was likely, even though it turned out to be very close, they couldn't really count on california ending up in the kennedy column. ohio had a natural tendency toward the republican party that was not true of some other midwestern states. so nixon probably had a little edge there. it also had fewer catholics. illinois, the polls showed nixon running ahead in illinois all spring more than in other parts of the country. and nixon was probably quite confident that he could carry illinois. the key to the election actually maybe turned out to be texas. kind of strange. i mean, texas hadn't played that key role before. but eisenhower carried texas very easily. and if nixon could hold on to texas and illinois, he could, in fact, win the election. a couple of days before the democratic national convention, nixon wrote a letter to a friend in which he said that he expected that kennedy almost certainly would be the democratic nominee, but he wasn't sure, y

the people of california the same way the case came to the california supreme court. on review from a decision from the california court of appeals, a lower tribunal, and the california electorate disagreed, respectfully, with their supreme court, and that's -- 43-decision and they reversed it. ... >> what is it that you are amending and can you amend that? nobody suggests we can't amend the california constitution no matter how the court has interpreted as a general rule. the question is can you mn something has not suggesting it's a fundamental right for purposes of this discussion. but is a valid reason to mn this constitution wonder the standard that we follow. >> well, your honor, i believe that the point is the people that are free to disagree. >> triet ceramica can you say we are not going to have segregated education we couldn't say yes to that >> that's because the federal constitution what about all that for the california supreme court had to say about it and wouldn't matter of the people did that before the california supreme court decision or after the california supreme court decision if the california constitution had provided that there would be the racial segre

we need to reline our system that measures and responds to the interests and intentions of the electorate. these are not california issues or new york or nebraska issues. we do not have red or blue issues. we have american issues around job creation and investment and a culture of auctioning off our government to the highest bidder. united we will stand and divided we will fall in our search to get america the debate it deserves to resolve these issues and create the 30 million jobs that we need and that can help us solve our problems. first up, two men who are working to try to make our electoral system better represent us. joining us here in the lone star state, mark mckinnen. you can catch his writings on the daily beast. also elliot ackerman. they are working to create an alternative platform for an alternative candidate on the national ballot this year. it's a pleasure to see both of you. >> thank you. keeping it weird. >> is that the slogan? >> yeah. >> i'm interested to get a sense -- first, they don't have any association wsh. >> they are working to change things within the system. but both have as a goal

million, gets three electoral votes, while california's population of 37 million entitles it to 55 electoral votes. still with me? okay, now listen to this. you'd think that if half the people in a state vote for one candidate and half vote for the other, then the electoral votes would be allocated accordingly. not so. only two states -- nebraska and maine -- allocate their electoral votes according to the popular vote. instead, most states are winner takes all. >> the winner-takes-all concept means that each state gives all of its electoral votes based on the popular vote in that state, so if candidate "a" wins the majority of the popular votes, he or she gets all of that state's electoral votes. >> but listen to this. let's say candidate "a" wins every popular vote in colorado. its population is just over 5 million. candidate "b" wins all the popular votes in new mexico and nebraska. their combined population is about 4 million. in a direct election, candidate "a" would win. he or she got the most votes from the people who went to the polls. but let's now look at the electoral votes. new mexico and nebraska each have five for a total of 10. but colorado only has ni

the ballot in fourteen states including california and with some twenty two million dollars raised already a likely be a all fifty state ballots by the time of the election so whoever is picked by american electorate hold a lot of sway in the upcoming election and here's the best part the american like committee. will have the final say in who gets to be the candidate regardless of who you if you're a member voted for in other words the vote is meaningless window dressing. and considering that americans elect is getting a considerable amount of its money and support from wall street hedge fund managers and other millionaires and billionaires it's safe to expect a millionaire or billionaire sympathizer to come out on top someone like new york mayor michael bloomberg who's actually now being touted on their website or someone like thomas friedman's main man david walker who is also featured on the american select web site for americans trying to save our democracy by getting corporate influence out of it corporate ruses like americans like to make it all the more difficult so what can be done catherine crier joins me now and in fact i the bio at the back your book is so much better than what i have

the many debates candidates have had. how are those discussions going to be handled here in california where you have a much more liberal electorate? >> well, my preference is for these candidates to discuss these social issues that you describe in a manner that relates to whether we're respecting people's different viewpoints, especially on issues of religion. whether we're honoring the freedom that our founders established, more so than perhaps some of the democrat candidates who want to propose or impose certain solutions. but the key for us here in california is we're facing this incredible ongoing budget crisis. so the republican party this year is going to be mostly focused on fiscal solutions. but, you know, newt gingrich will be here, he's bringing herman cain with him, michael reagan will be here. it's going to be pretty exciting. we'll have to see how they deal with it. once the primary's over it's going to be our job to convince californians we have better ideas in the fall. >> belva: we thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. thank you so much. >> thanks, please invite me back. >> belva: okay. well, in the last ho

the attorney general of california here talking about foreclosure. >> yeah, did he. >> hopefully some of your citizens will see benefit from that. there was a survey released last week and it said 22% of the electorateemselves somewhat conservative. >> we stick to the bread and butter issues. if you want solution to education, you vote for a democrat. if you want solution to housing crisis, you vote for a democrat. if you want a jobs plan you vote for the democrat because the republican party is not offering any plans or any action. they're all rhetoric. they're all talking about birth control and all these other things that the majority of women, whether they're democrat, republican conservative, or liberal, do not want the government interviewing them. that's how we had democrats win in this state and we'll continue to have democrats win in this state because we're a party of solutions in arizona. >> you have an amazing background. you're a young man. you went to harvard. you served in the marines and you're a state representative now. something tells me that you have a bright future. thank you for joining us inside "the war room." up next, brett ehrlich explains, takes on rick santorum's apparent

the electorate. how would your plan help to reconnect the voters to those they elect such they don't continue to be so horribly abused? >> there are some states that have independent commissions, californiaiowa, and that provides a system where you can actually get some competitive districts and you avoid the notion of these heavily-engineered jergerrymandd districts. i think this is the approach that has taken hold on some states, but we saw even in arizona, governor jan brewer tried to fire the woman who chaired because she voted for a couple of districts that were competitive. i think we need a national solution. the commission would take it out of the hands of the politicians. i think that's going to make a huge difference not today, of course, but the next time we go through this debok call across the country. >> the only thing that occurred to me, is no matter what you do with gerrymandering, you're going to have lefties living in new york city. a bunch in san francisco. that's how human beings are. you can't gerrymander. that's just human. that's okay. >> that is okay. there are certain collections of interests and personalities that will congregate. but by having an independent c

california's generally considered safe, nevada he took was a battleground, but he won there. michigan -- >> florida. >> thank you very much. how could i forget florida? they were central to the bid. big electoral something that is definitely on his path to 2012. struggling a little bit, the president is in the poll numbers there, due in large part all these places have high foreclosure rates. the announcement will go a long way to the fact he is doing something about it. something they complained about in the past. >> talk about how, and this is something i hear on capitol hill, is that president obama gets the best of both worlds here. he knows that any legislation that he'll deal with this won't get through the house gop. boehner dismissed it saying nothing he proposed so far worked. if anything were to become law, a lot of those people who had been paying and have not fallen behind would probably get upset their neighbors have been bailed out because they couldn't afford to pay. he is taking both sides here and gaining politically, right? >> yes. it's better to be seen as fighting, even if the fight is unsuccessful. that's something you heard from progressives this president, in their opini

the electorate. >> it's a hell of a lot better issue than building a home on the moon. trust me. >> stewart: i do. mike reagan, we always call you the voice of reason from california.n our show, varney and company, that's what we call you. it's a good title. we'll take it. >> thank you. >> stewart: now they fought for our country. now, they're coming home to another fight from our federal government. we will explain that one for you. [ leanne ] appliance park has been here since the early 50s. my dad and grandfather spent their whole careers here. [ charlie ] we're the heartbeat of this place, the people on the line. we take pride in what we do. when that refrigerator ships out the door, it's us that work out here. [ michael ] we're on the forefront of revitalizing manufacturing. we're proving that it can be done here, and it can be done well. [ ilona ] i came to ge after the plant i was working at closed after 33 years. ge's giving me the chance to start back over. [ cindy ] there's construction workers everywhere. so what does that mean? it means work. it means work for more people. [ brian ] there's a bright future here, and there's a chance to get on the ground

meet with tea partiers from southern california to northern washington state what you find are groups committed, active, and actually actively engaged in the electoral process, walking presignature, vetting candidates, candidates are rising up from within these organizations. you're going to see eelectric torial change like never before seen in this country. jon: are you making predictions? >> i think you'll see a sweep in the house of representatives, a bigger change than in 2010, i think we'll see a continuation of the trend we saw in state legislatures. in 2010, it was the largest change of legislature seats in the history of the party since we've been tracking it, we'll continue 20 see -- to see that sweep grow and that creates generational change, people will trick -- trickle up the system over the next 25 years and put us on the right path. jon: a lot of people assume that tea partiers are gunning for democratic seats in the senate and house, is that true sph. >> that's not true. tea partiers support the campaign for primary accountability, that's a separate organization but there are tea partiers who support it like myself and they're going a