[roamer_1]

Only if a referendum contradicts the letter or the spirit of the Constitution.

Forgive me if I am being obtuse, I am trying to understand:

If the state legislature elects to divide their electoral votes in the manner described herein, as is their right, would you still object to this? Is it simply the idea of using a referendum to do so that bothers you, or do you require that the state leave it's electoral votes whole?

[LS]

I'm not a constitutional lawyer, just a historian. My sense of the HISTORY of the Constitutional Convention is that the intent was to protect the states as institutions, even from themselves if necessary. Just as a state legislature (IMHO) can make no law infringing on the right to bear arms or on basic "civil rights," neither can a state legislature circumvent the Constitution by depriving ALL of its citizens their Constitutional right of one man one vote.

Now, strangely enough, in this case "one man one vote" means an electoral vote selected by a majority of the voters in that state when it comes to the electoral college. I realize Nebraska is different---but perhaps no one has yet brought a constitutional challenge to their system. I don't know. I just think that the SPIRIT of the constitution is such that a proportional system violates the principle of the electoral college.