Posted on 03/03/2019 5:38:03 PM PST by yesthatjallen
A plan to circumvent the Electoral College is gaining momentum among blue states after Democrats suffered two crushing defeats in presidential elections over the past two decades.
The plan has been given new impetus after Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) said this week that he will sign a bill to have his state become the 12th state along with the District of Columbia to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
The states making up the compact, which already includes New York, Illinois and all the New England states except for New Hampshire, would commit to awarding their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote nationally, regardless of the results in the Electoral College.
So far, these states, with Colorado, add up to 181 electoral votes, well short of the 270 needed to ascend to the White House.
Advocates are doubtful that enough states can join the compact for it to take effect by 2020, but hold hope of garnering enough support by 2024, as a handful of states like New Mexico also consider the measure, though proponents acknowledge the path to get to 270 will be far from easy.
Colorado state Rep. Emily Sirota (D), one of the sponsors of that state’s legislation, said she sees the compact “as a way to ensure that every vote is counted equally” and force candidates to campaign nationwide instead of targeting a few battleground states that can deliver success in the electoral math.
“If we had presidential candidates campaigning across the country, instead of a handful of swing states, you'd see a lot more participation from across the country and I think that is good and healthy for our electoral process,” Sirota told The Hill.
The renewed push comes after 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton lost the election that year despite winning the popular vote, the second time it has happened since the turn of the century.
The defeat was especially crushing to Democrats after a similar loss suffered by former Vice President Al Gore in 2000.
All states that are now part of the compact voted for Gore in 2000 and Clinton in 2016.
Colorado voted for Clinton last time but picked former President George W. Bush in 2000.
Critics of the Electoral College system have long argued it incentivizes candidates to target swing states with a bounty of electoral votes, while discouraging turnout by voters in states that are reliably red or blue.
Opponents of the current electoral system also say that electing a president through a popular vote could improve how presidents govern in office.
John Koza, the chairman of the National Popular Vote, a group that advocates for the compact, said the Electoral College “distorts” public policy by incentivizing presidents to cater to key swing states while in office, particularly in their first term.
"It's not only unfair that the second place candidate can win, it's also not good for the office of president or the country,” he said.
“When you're sitting in the White House … you say, ‘What states do I have to win and what do I have to do to win them?' That's just not a good way for public policy to be set,” Koza added.
Advocates of the compact are holding up hope that more steps will follow Colorado in joining the compact, which was first introduced in academic research papers as a way to effectively get rid of the electoral college system without going through the daunting process of a constitutional amendment.
The most promising is New Mexico, which has already passed a popular vote bill through one chamber and has a Democratic Governor.
Should it pass, the state would add 5 electoral votes to the compact, bringing the total to 186.
Meanwhile, legislators in 16 states have introduced bills this session seeking to join the compact, according to National Popular Vote.
Of those, Democratically-controlled Delaware, Maine, Nevada and Oregon look the most promising, with a total tally of 20 additional votes that could bring the total to 206 – though even there, the prospects are far from guaranteed.
Oregon state Rep. Diego Hernandez (D), a sponsor of the state’s popular vote bill, said there may not be enough momentum in the current legislative session to pass.
“We have so many big issues we're tackling this session, when it comes to housing and the environment and education and revenue reform, that although the conversation's happening, I'm not sure that it's the top priority in terms of the collective agenda,” Hernandez said.
But the prospect of passage in some of the other 16 states where a popular vote bill has been introduced look far less certain given many have split powers or are deep-red, like South Carolina or Mississippi.
Republicans are mostly opposed to any measure to derail the Electoral College system, seeing as unconstitutional.
Opponents of using the popular vote to elect presidents have long argued it would result in candidates catering to large cities and large states to rack up votes, which tend to have a bigger share of Democratic voters, ignoring smaller or rural areas.
Rose Pugliese, a county commissioner in Colorado, said in a tweet she had petitioned the Secretary of State not to award the state’s votes to the winner of the popular vote, saying such a move “allows California and New York to decide Colorado’s votes for President.”
Nonetheless advocates of the compact remain hopeful.
Koza, the National Popular Vote chairman, said garnering the necessary support by 2020 was “theoretically” possible, but believed it was more likely by 2024.
"You never know how a bandwagon can get rolling,” he said. “So at the moment, I couldn't name states that would get us there in time for 2020, although there's theoretically ways to do it. It seems perfectly plausible that we should get there by 2024."
This is rather simple....this tells me just how desperate blue states are....meaning, they know this election is going to end up wrong for their collective agenda.
-PJ
We should encourage the blue states to refuse to appoint electors at all as part of their protest of the Electoral College.
TN vs. IN, only half a letter different.
EVIL NEVER SLEEPS.
A couple thoughts:
* The Constitution nowhere proscribes the form or source of elector votes; however, it essentially prescribes that electors represent a choice by citizens of respective States;
* The prohibition that “of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves” will be problematic to this scheme, as any winners of a so-called popular vote will likely be citizens of the same State should the vote be decided nationally (I know that’s obtuse but the logic is there...);
* By the logic of this scheme, a coalition of 270 EV states could in advance of any election decide to cast all votes for the Republican candidate;
* A practical effect of this scheme would be to launch electoral reform and enforcement voter ID / citizenship and fraud, as these are tolerated until now by the EC isolation of fraud to the states, whereas this scheme would nationalize the fraud;
* The one test-case on this regarding one-man-one-vote in Mass is not a serious test, so I wouldn’t count out rulings on the scheme as unconstitutional;
* Imagine if the Republicans were doing this to the Dems: oh, the outrage!
The beginning of a dictatorship. Democrats believe in Authoritarians and dictatorship. This will be the downfall of the United States. But then again, the Democrats have wanted this since losing the Civil War
There are no Presidential elections in the Constitution, no State Legislature is required to use voting to appoint its Electors, so no, no voter's "rights" are involved.
If, however, blue states hold a voting process and do not allow Republicans on the ballot, as NJ is planning to do in 2020 with President Trump AND then use a "national popular vote" to infuence other state's EVs - THAT would be a big problem.
Just tell them to boycott the Electoral College.
Bucking for a civil war which they will lose badly.
How does someone this dumb get elected.
And of course no conservative judge will declare this unconstitutional.
Just keep the voter fraud thing going, we are not prosecuting or jailing anyone for this travesty on the American people the country and its founding. you will see in 2020
The national popular vote is a statistical composite of each states popular vote. Yeah, pretty much meaningless... a media creation for entertainment and debate purposes.
Democrats never stop scheming.
EVIL NEVER SLEEPS.
Good point. It’ll make for an interesting SCOTUS case. But to get there, you need an aggrieved party with standing which means an election would have occurred where this caused an untoward outcome.
I’m not sure how you can head this off before that.
In general, if you use the Trump-Sanders-Schultz scenario, it’s very likely that having Schultz run as an independent will draw more votes away from Sanders, as some Democrats simply view Sanders as a ‘nut’. Then Trump would end up with more state wins, and the massive landslide in the EC would occur.
Go back to 1860 and look over the four-way election that developed (Lincoln, Breckinridge, Bell and Douglas). If the Democrats hadn’t split into the regular faction Democrats versus the Southern Democrats, then Douglas would have won the election.
I think all of the blue states in this gimmick will regret their action, and reverse the EC change in 2021.
My thoughts exactly
He’ll win 100% of the Ev and they’ll cry foul
That depth of hatred is psychotic.
But what if Trump wins the popular vote?
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.