Posted on 05/22/2019 10:20:46 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
In order to do anything they can to stop President Trump from winning in 2020, Democrats in the Nevada Senate approved a National Popular Vote bill on a party-line vote, which will get rid of the Electoral College.
From the Washington Times:
Assembly Bill 186, which passed the Senate on a 12-8 vote, would bring Nevada into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an agreement between participating states to cast their electoral votes for the winner of the popular vote.
If signed as expected by Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak, Nevada would become the 16th jurisdiction to join the compact, along with 14 states and the District of Columbia. The compact would take effect after states totaling 270 electoral votes, and with Nevada, the total would reach 195.
While the effort has been billed by organizers as bipartisan, Democrats have embraced the NPV in the aftermath of President Trump’s 2016 victory, which saw the Republican win the electoral vote but not the popular vote.
Leftist groups like Common Cause, Indivisible and Public Citizen cheered the Nevada vote.
“The movement to abolish the electoral college is winning,” tweeted Public Citizen.
The NPV would not eliminate the Electoral College, but would render it irrelevant by requiring electors to vote for the national vote-winner instead of the candidate capturing the most votes in their states.
Supporters argue that it would shift the focus of presidential elections away from a handful of swing states, while critics say it would concentrate power in states like California and New York with the largest population centers.
Colorado, Delaware and New Mexico joined the compact in the 2019 legislative session, and other Democrat-controlled states are poised to follow.
Last week, the Maine Senate approved an NPV bill, sending it to the House. The Oregon bill has been approved by the Senate, and a House committee held a hearing Monday on the measure.
Here’s a great take on why this would be so damaging and not work like Democrats think it will. Special interests will take over this country.
From Real Clear Politics:
Unfortunately, like most of the ideas to improve our election system, this one will not accomplish what its sponsors intend, will result in the election of presidents who only get a fraction of the popular vote, and will likely enrage the voters of the very states that have already voted to join the system. The sponsors of this plan have not thought it through.
The first thing to understand about the American voting system is that it is the Electoral College that assures the continued existence of the two-party system. Because the winner of the presidency must get a majority of the electoral votes, the candidates of splinter or special interest parties have no chance to win—and for that reason they cannot get sufficient financing and other support to mount a serious campaign.
We have certainly had third and fourth parties in presidential elections, but their most effective role has been to bring ideas into the debate that might never otherwise receive attention, and they generally don’t survive to the next election. Nevertheless, when they have been in the field, they have deprived the candidates of the major parties of a national popular majority even though they have not interfered with the choice of the president through the Electoral College. Modern examples are the two Clinton elections in 1992 and 1996, and George W. Bush’s election in 2000.
The NPV plan would vastly improve the chances of a splinter or special interest candidate to win the presidency. In a wide enough field, a special interest candidate could easily win with less than a quarter of the national popular vote, and for this reason there will inevitably be a large number of splinter or special interest candidates running for president if the plan goes into effect.
If the Dems disenfranchise GOP voters we have two countries and break up the union, which is what the dems want because they hate America.
The Constitution now says whatever the hell any 5 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices want it to say at any point in time.
The SCOTUS needs to knock down this nonsense ASAP. States don’t get to make changes to the Constitution of their own volition.
I just hope that President Trump is able to replace Ginsburg and/or Breyer (the two octogenarian far left liberals) before the issue reaches the Supreme Court.
If Trump won the popular vote but lost Nevada and was just 8EV shy of the 270 needed to clinch, this would be poetic justice. In fact, I’d dearly wish that such a scenario happens.
Democrats managed to flip 7 House seats in California days after the election using “Vote Harvesting”, which is illegal in many states and ought to be illegal in all of them.
The Trump administration needs to institute a modern election system employing voter ID, the same as Mexico has had for years now.
All it would take is for a conservative Republican to carry Texas by a few million extra votes (like Clinton did in California) but lose the electoral college by a few votes for democrats to suddenly decide that the electoral college is vital to our Republic.
How exactly do they plan to reach 270 by next year?
Which states get them to 270?
If they can get to 270 , then a Democrat will already win those sames states the Constitutional way.
JUst calm down.
they cannot reach 270 y next year too many state legislatures needed to hit 270.
All those states under 10 EVS are not ready by next Summer.
Is it? I'd like to see proof. Quite the contrary, I believe. I was once of that belief, and then I read the Constitution regarding state's rights in this. Unfortunately, HOW the electoral votes are distributed are up to the states. All that matters is that they are using the EC. HOW they use it is up to them.
The index finger on my right hand has a terrible itch.
Maybe good for 2020, maybe not so much down the road.
If the electoral system is destroyed then the reason
for less populous states to support the Constitution
goes away. It was that caveat which made the
Constitution palpable to the small states. Take it
away and those states could rightfully secede in
my book.
Don't care? Hell, that is their intent!
This seems so obviously to disenfranchise a state’s voters. How can that be constitutional?
Does this mean a Federal Voter ID will be implemented since these Traitorous State Legislatures are colluding with each other?
I recall the Southern States agreed to collude back in the 1860’s.
The Constitution is clear and an analysis has been posted ad nauseum on FR.
You challenge it, so you post the applicable portions of the Constitution and provide your analysis.
Start here to make it easy for you,
https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2012/02/william-ross-vote-compact/
Very good point. But, if states choose to bend that way
I think it would change the status of the electoral system
enough to stir the SCOTUS to action. Then who knows?
Nevada might have been better off to write the law
in a way that allows their legislators to treat the
matter on a election to election basis.
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.