Two Cheers for the Electoral College

George Soros is funding an effort to undermine the Electoral College. The idea is to enter into a compact with other states in which each state agrees to require their electors to vote for the candidate who has won the national popular vote. The compact would not become effective until states comprising a majority of electoral votes have agreed.

The effort has resulted in the introduction of AB 751 in the Wisconsin legislature.

The proposal may well be unconstitutional under the Compact Clause. It is almost certainly motivated by partisan concerns. It isn’t simply that Democrats tend to be more geographically concentrated. That can actually help if Democratic voters are packed in the right states. Thus, while Bush lost the popular election and won the electoral vote in ’00, Kerry almost did the same thing in ’04.

Rather, the back story is population trends that will move electoral votes to Republican states. For the first time in who can remember, California will not pick up a seat and the Midwest and Northeast continue to lose population to the south and southwest.

Republicans should not be too sanguine. Large influxes of people into a state can change its political composition. When I was a kid, California was a fairly Republican state. But there is, nevertheless, reason to suspect that the electoral map is going to get tougher for Democrats. 

Continue ReadingTwo Cheers for the Electoral College

A View of ADR as Part of the Process Instead of an Alternative to the Process

In law school I had the impression that Alternative Dispute Resolution was a practice area separate from litigation. Seemingly, there was a Chinese wall between the trial advocacy classes and ADR classes. After all, my ADR classes never discussed the techniques for cross-examinations, and my trial advocacy classes never discussed mediation or arbitration strategies.

The ABA Young Lawyer Division’s latest newsletter perpetuates that myth in an article entitled “Top Ten Mistakes Litigators Make in Arbitration.” Certainly, the article gives good advice in telling us what to avoid — serving excessive document requests, using delay tactics, not cooperating, not being prepared, introducing redundant testimony, and filing untimely submissions. However, that advice is equally applicable to litigation as it is to arbitration.

In my experience, the differences between litigation and arbitration are cosmetic. 

Continue ReadingA View of ADR as Part of the Process Instead of an Alternative to the Process

Firm Positions from the Archbishop

In an appearance at Marquette Law School Tuesday, Milwaukee’s new Archbishop, the Most Reverend Jerome Listecki, discussed, among other things, the approach he will take to those who differ from Catholic Church positions on issues such as abortion.

Listecki said he wants to show personal warmth and good humor in carrying out his duties as head of the ten-county archdiocese, and the most effective way to deal with people is in a caring, one-on-one manner.

But when it comes to advocating policies, he made it clear he will come down on what is generally labeled the conservative side of church issues, and he will not be reluctant to speak out when he feels it is necessary.  

Continue ReadingFirm Positions from the Archbishop