Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill seeks to change Electoral College
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ^ | 2/18/08 | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Posted on 09/06/2008 4:46:21 AM PDT by Billg64

OLYMPIA -- State senators have approved a bill that would deliver the state's electoral votes to the U.S. presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

The bill, which passed 30-18 Monday, now heads to the House.

The bill would change Washington's current system of typically giving all of the state's electoral votes to the candidate who wins the statewide election to awarding all of the state's delegates to the national popular vote winner.

Almost every state has considered a similar bill. Maryland and New Jersey have passed such a measure.

The proposal would take effect only if enough states -- those with a majority of votes in the Electoral College -- agreed to it.


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: election; electionpresident; electoralcollege; politics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
To: Billg64

This sounds as smart a a box of rocks. If 49 states pass this rule then the 50th will decide ALL elections.

Only a liberal would even think this is a good law.

The founding fathers created the Electoral College for a reason and it has worked sublimely. This law disenfranchises the voters and usurps their vote.


21 posted on 09/06/2008 5:18:48 AM PDT by BuffaloJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billg64

Found it, thanks.

Looks like it is tabled until next year.

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/articles/forbes_20080801.php


22 posted on 09/06/2008 5:22:25 AM PDT by HEY4QDEMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I’m surprised someone hasn’t taken this all the way to the Supreme Court. They would definitely rule against it.


23 posted on 09/06/2008 5:24:28 AM PDT by chopperman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Billg64

Maryland has passed this bill, but I understand that it only goes into effect if many other states agree. The (stupid) idea is that if states totaling 270 electoral votes agree to the measure, then everyone will enact it at once.

I don’t know if there’s an expiration date.

It would be sweet justice if it were to backfire in our favor of course. That’s the fastest road to getting it repealed!


24 posted on 09/06/2008 5:25:36 AM PDT by RetroSexual
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billg64
In determining governance, the ballot box isn't the only one in play. I much prefer the ballot box, but if it comes to the integrity of the Republic, the other is a viable option.
25 posted on 09/06/2008 5:26:25 AM PDT by tbpiper (Obama/Biden: Instead of Ebony and Ivory, we have Arrogance and Insolence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chopperman
I’m surprised someone hasn’t taken this all the way to the Supreme Court. They would definitely rule against it.

Actually, I don't think they would. My interpretation is that states are allowed to choose their electors by whichever means they prefer. If a state chooses to stupidly throw their electors to a candidate they oppose, then that's their constitutional right.
26 posted on 09/06/2008 5:28:03 AM PDT by RetroSexual
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Billg64
This was passed in Maryland last year. It amazes me how asleep citizens are.

If this takes effect it devalues the vote of very Marylander from 1 out of 2.5 million for 10 electoral votes, to about 1 out of 40 million for the same electoral votes.

27 posted on 09/06/2008 5:29:41 AM PDT by Vision ("Test everything. Hold on to the Good." 1 Thessalonians 5:21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billg64
The libs still can't get over the 2000 election.
28 posted on 09/06/2008 5:31:16 AM PDT by Vision ("Test everything. Hold on to the Good." 1 Thessalonians 5:21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neb52

The Electoral College gets destroyed first, then, what’s left of the Senate will come under fire. It’s not “fair” that small states get 2 Senators just like big states.


29 posted on 09/06/2008 5:34:16 AM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RetroSexual

That is the most dastardly part of this bill; if it would work in the repubs favor, they do not need to trigger the new way of counting.


30 posted on 09/06/2008 5:34:20 AM PDT by Billg64 (LOL ROFL Senator Mccain for what????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Billg64

I’m not sure I follow this.

Would this law make it theoretically possible for 100% of the state of Massachusetts to have voted for candidate x, but the state’s delegates be awarded to candidate y because 51% of the nation did?


31 posted on 09/06/2008 5:35:00 AM PDT by Rammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billg64
That is the most dastardly part of this bill; if it would work in the repubs favor, they do not need to trigger the new way of counting.

Ahhh, so it's not automatically triggered? Well, as a Marylander I can tell you that getting McCain/Palin elected may be possible, but turning over our state legislature is a HUGE challenge!
32 posted on 09/06/2008 5:42:57 AM PDT by RetroSexual
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: reg45
"If Obama wins the Electoral College but loses the popular vote (as Bush did in 2000), this tomfoolery will die faster than a fruit fly."

Bingo! We have a winner!!

33 posted on 09/06/2008 5:44:06 AM PDT by KoRn (Barack Obama Must Be Stopped!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Billg64
that would deliver the state's electoral votes to the U.S. presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

Then why have states at all? Since they would not count in the national tally anyway this would be the first step in ridding the nation of individual States.

First the state borders will not count, then the national borders, pretty soon we really will have candidates campaigning in France, Ugandi, Russia, China etc because they will be voting in the US election because hey, whomever gets the U.S. Presidential election "affects them too ya know."

What a bunch of ignorant bastards.

34 posted on 09/06/2008 5:46:15 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billg64

This is a blatant attempt by the Rats to have the far left coast, the NE, and Chicago select the POTUS.

We all know how that would work out, don’t we?


35 posted on 09/06/2008 5:49:08 AM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty

They are far from ignorant. They know exactly what they are doing. They are planning on taking control of a Nation. The Electoral Cllege is all that stands between us and the unwashed masses. Once it has been neutralized 10 cities and 3 States can control a Presidental Election.

If Mc Cain is elected we will have 4 perhaps 12 years to fight this should we choose to but nothing or so nearly nothing that one could say that nothing was done in the 8 years of the Bush Administration to combat voter fraud.

Should Obama be elected we will get decide whether we will go into slavery peacefully, or not.

Those are the choices we will soon get to make.

The Dempcrat Party and the islamics intend to take over control of the United States. They are not going to deviate from this goal. They will have to be stopped.


36 posted on 09/06/2008 5:50:15 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RetroSexual
Actually, I don't think they would. My interpretation is that states are allowed to choose their electors by whichever means they prefer. If a state chooses to stupidly throw their electors to a candidate they oppose, then that's their constitutional right.

You are absolutely correct. I remember my Constitutional Law professor in law school stating that if my home state of Oklahoma was to decree by state law that the electors shall be the tuba section of the University of Oklahoma marching band then it would be constitutional. Extreme example, but it made the point that the states decided how electors are chosen. Oklahoma was talking about the same thing a few years back. I called my state rep and spoke with the secretary. She couldn't understand why I would be for this, after all wouldn't I want the person who got the most votes to win. I told her I do want the person who gets the most votes in Oklahoma to win. That basically what we are having in the electoral college system is 50 individual popular vote elections. (57 if your 0bama) Otherwise you are letting the major population centers decide the President. I don't think she ever got it.
37 posted on 09/06/2008 5:53:09 AM PDT by Federalist Society
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Squantos; Jeff Head; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Travis McGee; PhilDragoo; devolve; STARWISE; Enchante

“Seem’s we’re getting closer and closer to that edge we can’t step back from.......”

Which is why this election is so important.

If the Islamofacist puppet wins, we can kiss America good bye.


38 posted on 09/06/2008 5:54:41 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (I do not want to know the type of person, who does not like Sarah Palin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Therefore if 20 candidates run for the president, and the winner has only 20% of the national vote, that means that we’ve somehow improved things by putting a grossly unsupported person into the White House?

Been there, done that. Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 with 42% of the national vote.

39 posted on 09/06/2008 5:56:05 AM PDT by ContraryMary (New Jersey -- Superfund cleanup capital of the U.S.A.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Billg64

Oh sure, join MD in its not mere stupidity, but blatant asininnity (excuse the non-word).

These assholes are essentially curtailing all our votes, and stupidly getting us in a circular situation when everyone adopts this asinine stupidity. When all states do this, then how do you send your EVs?


40 posted on 09/06/2008 6:02:54 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson