Posted on 07/19/2010 2:13:49 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The state Legislature is poised to give final approval this week to a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.
Both the House and Senate have approved the National Popular Vote bill. Final enactment votes are needed in both chambers, however, before the bill goes to the governor's desk, the Globe reported last week.ss.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
.jpg)
Self-serving piggies in the Massachusetts General Court
would NEVER let the citizens vote (what is that?)
about RomneyCARE, gay marriage, or this BS.
Team Romney would not even allow a GOP primary this year.
They do whatever the New York Times
and their carpetbagging pimp order them to do.
Good for you Maceman!!!!!
Without the electoral college, large cities will control and elect our Presidents.
Without the electoral college, a candidate will only have to campaign in cities like New York, LA, Philly, Pittsburgh and others. Rural and small town America will be at the mercy of a few large cities across the nation, as that is where the majority of the population resides.
Go ahead small state, flush any reason for a candidate to listen to even visit massachsetts.
The end of our country is here.
So these dopes will never ever be forced to switch to the Democratic candidate if the national vote goes that way.
This can only make them switch to Republican, instantly disenfranchising all the dopey liberals in their state.
Why vote at all Massachussetts? You dumbasses.
Looks stupid to me. As a state that has been losing its population for over a decade they are just handing what little power it has away.
They might as well elimanate representation in the US Senate too.
Congress? How so?
Jefferson was afraid of big-cities vs. the rural. He knew what happend in Europe..
Any GOP votes likely to come out of this?
It’s really way too late.
Really. The Constitution does not require a state to divide its electors among multiple candidates based on the popular vote within the state.
The EC was put in place so that the more populace states don’t control the presidency .... we don’t want three or four heavily populated states to determine the presidency ....
The Constitution does not prevent any state from voluntarily deciding to silence the voice of it's own people in a presidential election.
I guess it never occurred to them that some state would be stupid enough to do so. They never met a modern liberal.
One can only hope that enough elected legislators have both sufficient IQ and the firm grasp of our country's history to understand why this is a fatal blow to our republic, and the reasons why the electoral college was deliberately and thoughtfully created within the Constitution.
To insure that the U.S. system would not degenerate to the mob rule that destroyed every other attempt at direct democracy.
Most within months, the remainder within five years.
For those in Rio Linda or Washington DC, just Google "France+Reign of Terror"
You are correct. The selection process is constitutional. Article 2 Section 1 reads “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors”. If the states want to throw away their power and give the electors to the majority vote (fraud) winner, then they can.
However, I believe forcing the electors to vote for a certain candidate is unconstitutional.
Where this law fails the compacts test is that the law does not take effect unless other states totaling 270 electoral votes also joins the compact. It also doesn't say what happens should a compact state decide to drop out of the compact. Do all the states then revert back to their prior method until another state joins the compact?
-PJ
sadly, it’s not unconstitutional. Constitution says state legislatures can award electoral votes however they want.
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress. (II, 2; U.S. Constitution).
Precisely. The purpose of this is to enslave the countryside to the big cities.
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.