The total might be even higher already.
But that has a number of analysts alarmed, including author Tara Ross, who has written in opposition to the concept of a direct national vote for president at the Save Our States.com website.
"Eliminating the Electoral College would probably mean at least two things: Elections will become easier to steal and the two-party system will be undermined. So it follows that two types of political parties would benefit the most: Those that don't mind stealing elections and third parties," she wrote.
The California-based National Popular Vote has been working since about 2006 on its plan that would assign Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who has captured the most individual votes in a presidential election nationwide – no matter who has won in an individual state.
The Electoral College system now assigns votes by the state – or in a couple of cases by the congressional district – based on the popular vote in that state or district. This is the circumstance that gave George W. Bush the presidency in 2000 even though Al Gore collected more popular votes.
It is being promoted in state legislatures – it has been introduced in all 50 – as a compact among the states in which legislators commit their state's votes to the popular vote winner as soon as there are enough states to guarantee a victor with 270 ElectoralCollege votes.
So far, Hawaii, with 4 votes; New Jersey, 15; Illinois, 20; Maryland, 10; and Washington, 11; have made commitments. As of now, there are active bills that could put another three states in that camp: New York, 31; Massachusetts, 12; and Delaware, 3.
That would total 106 of the needed 270 Electoral College votes.
Spokesman Barry Fadem told WND the move would help small states and other "flyover" regions where political candidates don't usually campaign because a vote is a vote wherever, and advertising and such would be less expensive in rural areas.
He said the compact among the states is perfectly legitimate because the Founding Fathers gave to the state legislatures the responsibility to determine the allocation of Electoral College votes.
"Why would a presidential candidate campaign in Hawaii or Alaska? The reason is because every vote would count," he said.
However, Ross, who has written, "Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College," said in a National Review analysis that the campaign is coming "startlingly close to success even as most Americans remain completely unaware that the presidential-election process is so close to being turned on its head."
7 comments:
why vote then? if you are just going to change my vote to whomever you tell me to change it to....why bother?
The change would be unconstitutional.
But then, since when do Dumbocrats pay any attention to the constitution?
I would love the president to be elected by the popular vote. It would be great to have the 2 party system broken up. And the top 2 or 3 candidates could have a runoff.
They don't change your vote; the winner of the popular vote just wins the Presidency. This is the system we use for literally every other elected office in the country (Representatives, Senators, Governors, and more).
And the change would not be unconstitutional since the Constitution intentionally gives full and sole rights to the individual states to decide how to allot their electoral college votes. The Constitution does not suggest any specific way to do that; the "winner take all" system we have now is nowhere in the Constitution either, its just the method we have settled for in most states.
Remember Al Gore got more popular votes than George Bush in 2000.
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together
with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or
Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United
States, shall be appointed an Elector.
The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two
persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State
with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and
of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and
transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to
the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence
of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the
Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes
shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of
Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and
have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall
immediately choose by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a
Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like
Manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the Votes shall be
taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum
for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the
States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In
every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest
Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there
should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall choose from
them by Ballot the Vice-President.
The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
United States.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at
the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office
of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not
have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a
Resident within the United States.
In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death,
Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said
Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by
Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of
the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as
President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be
removed, or a President shall be elected.
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation,
which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he
shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other
Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following
Oath or Affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of
President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
ive been advocationg getting rid of the electoral college for some time. there was a time and a place for it and its gone now.
if you look at a county by county tally of the last election all you need to are cary 1 or 2 cities in most states to win the state. in md thats the baltimore area, in pa its philly and pittsburg, ect ect
the rest of the state has almost no say.
maybe if al gore would have won we wouldnt have ended up with obama.
Post a Comment