Posted on 12/17/2025 10:09:37 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy.
Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause, while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic.
In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.
Key Takeaways:
- The National Popular Vote (NPV) scheme strikes directly at the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic.
- The NPV scheme would encourage voter fraud and elevate the importance of urban centers while diminishing the influence of small states and rural areas.
- The supporters of NPV are not hiding their goal: They are trying to manipulate the Electoral College out of existence.
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
The one thing I can think of off hand that would break the federation of States, that might actually happen.
Interstate pacts are unconstitutional without congressional authorization.
It’s unconstitutional. It’s negating the votes of voters who voted for the guy who won the state.
There’s a constitutional problem - a clause saying that no state may be deprived of its its equal vote in the Senate without its permission. Given that the Constitution enshrines the electoral college for choosing Presidents, any federal or state laws affecting that seem unconstitutional given the equal vote in the Senate requirement.
The biggest red flag on Democrat agendas re: all of this and more is the proposal to expand and pack the Supreme Court and/or issue term limits for Justices.
There is nothing in the Federal constitution about "voting for President" or "winning a state".
The President is chosen by 538 voters, appointed by 50 State Legislatures (+3 by Congress), using whatever method seems wise to them.
To Trump’s credit, he doesn’t write off entire races and ethnicities. And he is willing to make a serious run at places like New Jersey. Does well in rust belt cities.
Indeed to Trump’s credit, he won the popular vote!
But outside of that there is too much GOP complacency re: the map. “Like oh, who cares about NYC. Don’t even bother throwing our hat in the ring.” Very toxic mentality. 🙄
The coalition of City States is controlled with the votews of the riff raff Holi Poli.
Like Athens, America can be destroyed by democracy
POPULATION OF NYC ALONE=== OVER 8,478,000
TOTAL STATE OF WYOMING=== 587,618
NYC BY ITSELF == 14 TIMES THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF WYOMING
THIS WILL LEAD TO ALL NATIONAL ELECTIONS BEING WON BY LARGE CITIES.
There is nothing in the least "republican" about the Connecticut plan or the Electoral College.
A method of choosing the Executive borrowed from the Holy Roman Empire?
C'mon, man!
But there is about denying voters their votes. If you clain the winner to be the person with the fewesr votes you have denied people their voting rights. Like it or not Presidents are not voted on by states. Electors are.
I guess the Constitution is just to complicated for theses purposely undereducated numbnuts. Leave this alone and repeal the 17th amendment and set our nation back on an even keel.
It is a core belief of Progressives that the Constitution place far too many restraints on government power.
Progressives believe government is the source of almost all good things. Restraining government power means preventing good things from happening.
With such a core belief about the nature of reality, it is easy to see how they get and promote their ideas.
bump
But, Hillary favors abolition of the EC, and she’s a lawyer.
And if the case were taken to the same Supreme Court that declined to hear the case of many States, suing many others, for changing their election laws after the election in 2020, but before 1-6-21....?
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.