Last week, the Maine state Senate voted in support of the plan one week after both houses of the New York legislature overwhelmingly supported it.
Now the governors of both states will need to decide whether to formally back the National Popular Vote, or NPV.
The plan is more than halfway to its goal of electing future presidents via the popular vote, after Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee, an independent, signed on last July.
READ MORE
20 comments:
By this point we have developed enough to have a true popular vote. The electoral college is just another way to take control away from the people.
Majority rules, who cares about the fly over states. Coastal states will rule!
Democracy = 51% taking away the rights of the other 49%. Bad idea
Exactly, 6:49! That's why we are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. Taking away the College wil destroy what the Founding Fathers fought so hard for. (the rest of the way).
Just say no.
As long as this isn't used as a stepping stone to alter the Constitution even moreso.The overwhelming majority of the Constitution is timeless.
726, what do you mean by that? Maybe something like "as long as I can keep my doctor and my rates will go down.."
Are you an idiot?
But I repeat myself...
Civil war is inevitable.
@ 6:49
I like this description of democracy.
Democracy is two wolfs and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.
Sand Box John
7:26 - it actually is a sidestepping of the constitution...by making the electoral college irrelevant, the Democrats (that support this) don't have to go through the proper process of amending the constitution.
It's the Democrat way, shred the constitution and all the controls, checks, and balances that the founding fathers put in place to protect the people from an over reaching government.
WAKE-UP AMERICANS!
This is a terrible George Soros funded idea to give the progressives and their liberal urban constituents absolute control of national politics. There was a reason for the Electoral College namely to give less populated states a say in the government. Pure democracy devoid of checks and balances becomes mob rule. 11:35’s description is accurate.
The Electoral College is the 538 dedicated party activists elected by us from among party slates. They represent the total number of electors granted to states based on how many members of Congress they have.
With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a republic, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes by states, to represent us and conduct the business of government.
Rather than “dump,” “bypass,” or “junk” the Electoral College, National Popular Vote allows individual states to use their unqualified and absolute right to have the Electoral College accomplish a goal that more than two-thirds of Americans, throughout the country, have consistently supported since polling on this began in 1944.
States enacting National Popular Vote replace their state or district winner-take-all rules to guarantee every vote, everywhere, in every election matters to the candidates, is equal and counts, and the candidate with the most votes in the country wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.
National Popular Vote is based on Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide how to appoint its own electors. Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states:
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.”
The Constitution does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for how to award a state’s electoral votes.
Over the years, states have used their unqualified and absolute power to enact laws for how to award their electors in presidential elections.
Prior to arriving at the eventual wording of section 1 of Article II, the Constitutional Convention specifically voted against a number of different methods for selecting the President, including
● having state legislatures choose the President,
● having governors choose the President, and
● a national popular vote.
After these (and other) methods were debated and rejected, the Constitutional Convention decided to leave the entire matter to the states.
In 1789, a majority of the states appointed their presidential electors using two of the rejected methods in the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 (i.e., appointment by the legislature and by the governor and his cabinet). Presidential electors were appointed by state legislatures for almost a century. Only 3 states used the “winner-take-all” system based on the statewide popular vote. Similar laws in other states only became prevalent decades after the deaths of the Founding Fathers. 2 states do not use the system.
As a result of changes in state laws enacted since 1789, the people have the right to vote for presidential electors in 100% of the states, there are no property requirements for voting in any state, and the state-by-state winner-take-all method is used by 48 of the 50 states. States can, and have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Maine and Nebraska do not use the winner-take-all method– a
reminder that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not required to change the way the President is elected.
The normal process of effecting change in the method of electing the President is specified in the U.S. Constitution, namely action by the state legislatures. This is how the current system was created, and this is the built-in method that the Constitution provides for making changes. The abnormal process is to go outside the Constitution, and amend it.
1:17 Nice research and post. The last sentence disturbs me knowing the level of respect the Democrats and establishment Republicans have for the Constitution. George Soros a leading advocate of the popular vote movement has declared the constitution outdated and irrelevant. He is pushing for a new “progressive” constitution to be created. The progressive movement is the evolution of the communist movement.
I agree 8:58, Civil WAR is needed to bring us back....
National Popular Vote is a nonpartisan coalition of legislators, scholars, constitutionalists and grassroots activists committed to preserving the Electoral College, while guaranteeing the presidency to the candidate who earns the most votes in all fifty states.
The National Advisory Board of National Popular Vote includes former Congressmen John Anderson (R–Illinois and later independent presidential candidate), John Buchanan (R–Alabama), Tom Campbell (R–California), and Tom Downey (D–New York), and former Senators Birch Bayh (D–Indiana), David Durenberger (R–Minnesota), and Jake Garn (R–Utah).
Supporters include former Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN), Governor Jim Edgar (R–IL), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA)
In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin. It was endorsed by Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and various members of Congress who later ran for Vice President and President such as then-Congressman George H.W. Bush, and then-Senator Bob Dole.
On February 12, 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the National Popular Vote bill by a 28–18 margin.
Saul Anuzis, former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party for five years and a former candidate for chairman of the Republican National Committee, supports the National Popular Vote plan as the fairest way to make sure every vote matters, and also as a way to help Conservative Republican candidates. This is not a partisan issue and the NPV plan would not help either party over the other.
The Nebraska GOP State Chairman, Mark Fahleson, supports NPV.
Rich Bolen, a Constitutional scholar, attorney at law, and Republican Party Chairman for Lexington County, South Carolina, wrote:"A Conservative Case for National Popular Vote: Why I support a state-based plan to reform the Electoral College.
Some other supporters who wrote forewords to "Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote " include:
Laura Brod served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2003 to 2010 and was the ranking Republican member of the Tax Committee. She was the Minnesota Public Sector Chair for ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) and active in the Council of State Governments.
James Brulte served as Republican Leader of the California State Assembly from 1992 to 1996, California State Senator from 1996 to 2004, and Senate Republican leader from 2000 to 2004.
Ray Haynes served as the National Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 2000. He served in the California State Senate from 1994 to 2002 and was elected to the Assembly in 1992 and 2002
Dean Murray was a member of the New York State Assembly. He was a Tea Party organizer before being elected to the Assembly as a Republican, Conservative Party member in February 2010. He was described by Fox News as the first Tea Party candidate elected to office in the United States.
Thomas L. Pearce served as a Michigan State Representative from 2005–2010 and was appointed Dean of the Republican Caucus. He has led several faith-based initiatives in Lansing.
Over 90% of the contributions supporting the National Popular Vote effort have come—in about equal total amounts—from
● Tom Golisano (a pro-life, anti-Buffett-rule, registered Republican businessman residing in Florida) and
● John R. Koza (a pro-choice, pro-Buffett-rule, registered Democratic businessman residing in California).
With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in only the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency with a mere 23% of the nation's votes!
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).
Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls
in recent or past closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA --75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%;
in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%;
in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and
in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.
Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.
The bill has passed 33 state legislative chambers in 22 rural, small, medium, and large states with 250 electoral votes.
Based on the current mix of states that have enacted the National Popular Vote compact, it could take about 25 states to reach the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the compact.
NationalPopularVote
Fat chance without a Constitutional Convention -- anything less will foment a duopoly --a New USA --one Progressive and one Armed and ready for War against them.
all of the demagoguery regarding Slavery and the Civil War -- was just the same people looking to control who they desire to control today --and the lies they use to try and hide that desire.
This would make voter Id laws absolutely necessary in order to ensure against major voter fraud and to make sure only qualified US citizens vote and not the millions of illegal immigrants who have not earned the right to vote yet by becoming citizens. If this is not done kiss a free America good bye forever.
Our own state of Maryland is a perfect example of rule by popular vote. Baltimore, Prince George's, and Montgomery counties run the show. Check your tax statement, take a look around, and tell me how that's working out for you. Taxation without representation.
With National Popular Vote, the candidate with the most votes would win, as in virtually every other election in the country.
National Popular Vote has nothing to do with pure democracy or "rule by popular vote". That would be pure democracy when people vote on policy initiatives directly.
With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a republic, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes by states, to represent us and conduct the business of government.
Post a Comment