Replies

This probably not unconstitutional. There is no provision in the Constitution nor in Federal law that requires electors to vote based on the popular vote in their state. Political parties often extract “pledges” from the electorates but that’s about it. It has happened before that an electorate did not cast his vote for the candidate of his states choosing, but there was no law broken therefore no jail time etc. I think all that can be done is a fine. Maybe someone else can elaborate............

"This probably not unconstitutional."

I don't see why this would be unconstitutional. The Constitution allows the state legislature wide latitude in how it's electors will vote. .

(Article 2 - US Constitution)
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

Technically, Mass legislature could pass a law saying that it's electors WILL vote DEMOCRAT and not hold a Presidential election at all.

Even if this passes in Mass. I doubt it will last one election cycle past the first time all of their electoral votes go to a Republican. Which is very likely to be 2012.

One big problem though. Determining total popular vote is VERY difficult, and this is where I suspect the real evil may lie. For example, in 2000 - there were almost a million votes in California that were never counted. That's because Gore already had a 2 million vote lead. So, there was no need to open almost a million absentee and military ballots.

If this passes in more than a few states, the Dem election thieves (think Franken) will scour the country mining found votes in every nook and cranny they can find. In a close vote they may be able to "mine" enough votes from various states - that don't even change the state outcome - but tip the scales of the popular vote.

In short - a terrible idea - but seems perfectly Constitutional. Too bad there is no constitutional provision to protect voters from their own foolishness.