(10-16-2021 09:28 AM)BlueDragon Wrote: (10-15-2021 07:32 AM)mvymvy Wrote: (10-14-2021 10:45 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: (10-14-2021 09:07 AM)bobdizole Wrote: (10-14-2021 08:55 AM)gdunn Wrote: So I know we've had this brought up a few times over the past.. But earlier this week I saw where Michigan was trying to get in on it.
For those who don't know, several states are trying to band together and when they hit 270 electoral votes they'll have legislation in place to award their electoral votes to the President who wins the popular vote not who wins their state.
So my question to the group is do you think this is constitutional or even legal?
It seems to be a clear violation of the Compact Clause and the 12th and 20th Amendments. If it ever passed the required number of states I can't see the supreme court not striking it down.
Im pretty sure it says the state legislatures run the election in each state. Its probably legal---but its stupid. Why would you want to undermine the wishes of your own states voters? Wouldnt the wiser choice be to apportion your states electoral votes to reflect the outcome of the election (rounded to the nearest elector)? So, if the vote was 60% to 40%---the states winning candidates would get 6 of the states 10 electoral votes and the loser would get 4 electoral votes. At least that reflects the actual voter outcome in your state.
Proportional awarding of electors by state would not be a fair “compromise” or solution.
There are good reasons why no state even proposes, much less chooses, to award their electors proportionally.
In 4 of the 8 elections between 1992 and 2020, the choice of President would have been thrown into the U.S. House (where each state has one vote in electing the President).
Based on the composition of the House at the time, the national popular vote winner would not have been chosen in 3 of those 4 cases, regardless of the popular vote anywhere.
Electors are people. They each have one vote. The result would be a very inexact whole number proportional system.
Every voter in every state would not be politically relevant or equal in presidential elections.
It would not accurately reflect the nationwide popular vote;
It would reduce the influence of any state, if not all states adopted.
It would not improve upon the current situation in which four out of five states and four out of five voters in the United States are ignored by presidential campaigns, but instead, would create a very small set of states in which only one electoral vote is in play (while making most states politically irrelevant),
It would not make every vote equal.
It would not guarantee the Presidency to the candidate with the most popular votes in the country.
The National Popular Vote bill is the way to make every person's vote equal and matter to their candidate because it guarantees the majority of Electoral College votes to the candidate who gets the most votes among all 50 states and DC.
It would also ensure mob rule and minority rights will become a thing of the past.
Are you and those likeminded so blind that you have no idea why the process that is now in place was adopted?
Let's say brain dead politicians enact what you and likeminded uneducated trolls want. The first thing you have is disenfranchised rural voters. These rural voters make up 1% of the GDP. These folks are producing what urban people have the luxury of going in supermarkets and buying affordable groceries.
Are you really willing to exclude them from the process for a ton of government subsidized people living in government facilities in urban areas?
What happens next rural stop producing large amounts and just enough to sustain themselves in effect starve out the municipalities. Most people like yourself have no idea that are always going to be negatives that come along with your fake blue sky.
“I would rather have a popular vote. “
Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
“I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”
Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
"The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."
In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
In 1970, The U.S. House of Representatives voted 338–70 for a national popular vote.
3 Southern segregationist Senators filibustered it.
Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX), Bob Dole (R-KS), Gerald Ford (R-MI), Richard Nixon (R-CA),
Supporters of the National Popular Vote bill have included former Gov. Gary Johnson (Libertarian – NM), 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)
Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”
The National Advisory Board of National Popular Vote has included former Congressman John Buchanan (R–Alabama), and former Senators David Durenberger (R–Minnesota), and Jake Garn (R–Utah), plus Michael Steele (former RNC Chair), and Rick Tyler
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 National Popular Vote plan would not help either party over the other.
Bob Barr (2008 Libertarian presidential candidate) supports the National Popular Vote bill: “Only when the election process is given back to all of the people of all of the states will we be able to choose a President based on what is best for all 50 states and not just a select few.”
The Advisory Board of Libertarians for National Popular Vote consists of Gary Johnson (2016 Libertarian presidential candidate), Lincoln Chafee, Ed Lopez, Kevin R. L. Martin, and Michael Melendez.
“In each presidential election, millions of libertarian votes go either unheard as third-party ballots or unappreciated by the major party candidates that receive them. The 4.5 million votes cast for Gary Johnson in the 2016 election represent a population greater than any of the 25 least-populated states. The many libertarians who felt they had no other choice but to vote for an establishment candidate, or not vote at all, make that population even larger. But, with the current state-based winner-take-all method, this population of libertarians spread across the country has none of the electoral power afforded to states. A citizen’s individualized right to electoral power should not be endowed to political forces larger than themselves.”
Supporters include:
The Nebraska GOP State Chairman, Mark Fahleson.
Michael Long, chairman of the Conservative Party of New York State
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."
Rick Tyler, senior member of Senator Ted Cruz's campaign team, serving as the National Spokesman and Communications Director for Cruz for President.
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 the California Republican Party chairman, 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 as a Republican 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 who 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.
Since polling began in 1944 until the 2016 election, support for a national popular vote has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in polls
On March 7, 2019, the Delaware Senate passed the National Popular Vote bill in a bi-partisan 14-7 vote
In 2018, the National Popular Vote bill in the Michigan Senate was sponsored by a bipartisan group of 25 of the 38 Michigan senators, including 15 Republicans and 10 Democrats.
The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).
In 2016 the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill 40-16-4.
Two-thirds of the Republicans and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives sponsored the bill.
In January 2016, two-thirds of the Arizona Senate sponsored the bill.
In 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill by a 28–18 margin.
In 2009, the Arkansas House of Representatives passed the bill
On March 25, 2014 in the New York Senate, Republicans supported the bill 27-2; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative Party by 26-2; The Conservative Party of New York endorsed the bill.
In the New York Assembly, Republicans supported the bill 21–18; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative party supported the bill 18–16.
Since 2006, the bill has passed 41 state legislative chambers in 25 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 283 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (15), Minnesota (10), North Carolina (16), Oklahoma (7) and Virginia (13), and both houses in Nevada (6).
The bill has been enacted by 16 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 195 electoral votes – 72% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes.
When enacted by states with 270 electoral votes, it would change state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, without changing anything in the Constitution, again using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to choose how to vote.