Skip to comments.Oregon set to change the way it awards Electoral College votes [COMPACT]
Posted on 06/06/2019 12:15:20 PM PDT by nwrep
SALEM Oregon is close to becoming the 15th state to signal that it will award its Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes nationwide.
On a 37-22 party line vote, the Democratic majority in the Oregon House sent Senate Bill 870 to the desk of Democratic Gov. Kate Brown, who has indicated her support.
Instead, said Rep. Allisa Keny-Guyer, D-Portland, the compact would make Oregon more relevant during presidential campaigns. The Republican presidential candidates write Oregon totally off, and the Democratic candidates take Oregon for granted, she said. So we are just relegated to being a spectator state.
Trump will win by an electoral landslide. Then those leftist states who went that way will $h!t their pants.
This is setting up Trump to win electoral votes he would have no chance at otherwise. Boy are they going to have egg on their faces when they lose the popular vote this time around.
I thought there was a provision in the Constitution whiich prevents one state from doing something based on another states actions
By basing the award of their electoral votes on the voting in other states (which have varying degrees of standards in their election processes) this likely violates the equal protection clause. It also disenfranchises the voters of Oregon, as it does not award their electors based on the wishes of the Oregon voters, but rather on a non-existent construct: the national popular vote. This is no certified national popular vote, it is a construct of the media which performs a summation of state popular votes on election night in order to have something to report.
This should be unconstitutional as it can disenfranchise a state’s voters that won that state.
Another example that leftists, by whatever name, reject the Constitution.
I take the postion that basing the award of electoral votes on data from outside the state (votes or dice throws) effectively dilutes the value of local voters selections.
Thus, it violates the rule of ‘one man, one vote’ and equal protection under the constitution.
Execution of such a ‘compact’ is thus unconstitutional on its face.
Well, it is:
Article 1, Section 10:
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Like Oregon is ever going to be anything but Democrap.’
If I lived there I would care, but I don’t care, because the results would be the same.
Except I wonder if all the residents of OR are aware of the treachery their leaders are pulling off.
Alissa disagrees with you - she says it will make Oregon MORE relevant :-)
I favor the district system as it minimizes the disenfranchisement of voters.
Whoever wins a congressional district by 50%+ gets that vote. If no one gets 50%+, have a run off with the top 2 vote earners and do not allow write ins. Whoever wins that run off election gets that elector vote.
One electoral vote awarded to the candidate that receives the most votes in the state.
Last electoral vote awarded to the candidate that wins the most districts. If no candidate wins then the Gov decides between the candidates that received at least one district.
I voted from Trump, but all of the electoral votes for my state went to Clinton.
"One man, one vote" is not what the EC does.
The biggest spit in the face is how they call this “bipartisan” even as it’s ramrodded through various state legislatures (like here, yet again) on party-line votes and only in states that voted Clinton in 2016 (and Obama in 2012, Obama in 2008...)
I sincerely hope five Justices of the Supreme Court just toss their decades of hard work on this out the window overnight. Would be a fitting end to their attempted one-party end-run. They’ve been at it since like 2006, and since no state that voted for Trump in 2016 has passed this, and big Electoral College loser Hillary Clinton won only 232 electoral votes, I have to assume it’s still many, many years away from 270, especially when you consider that the GOP could very easily take control of certain state legislatures and governorships in a 2022 ‘red wave’ under President Biden or whatever and simply repeal it, it passed by a simple one-party majority vote in Colorado, it can be repealed just as easily with a one-party GOP majority vote in that state. Even if they got every blue state that voted Clinton in 2016 (and they haven’t, at all), they’re still about forty short, maybe even more than forty after the 2020 Census, where are those electoral votes coming from? The fact is, if there were enough blue states that they could get this to 270 right now, they wouldn’t even be bothering, they’d be winning every election as is.
Hopefully Trump will get a majority and all of these Blue States will go red. But I wouldn’t count on it.
If Trump wins the popular vote Oregon will not give him their electoral votes.
If this thing ever comes into force - which I doubt because its not in the interests of smaller states and especially of red states, but if it ever does - I will LMAO if the blue states signing up for this foolishness are required by their own rules to cast their electoral votes for the Republican.
Betcha dollars to donuts if that happens, theyll invent some weasel excuse so they dont have to follow their own law. Think of Massachusetts having to vote for Trump. Theyll never do it no matter the law and even if hes already won anyway.
Imagine the chaos when the national popular vote is very close, and you have accusations of vote fraud in other states where your state has no jurisdiction to contest anything. So you just reversed the wishes of your voters and handed an electoral vote landslide to an illegitimate candidate based on the illegalities occurring in another state.
Why don’t they just get rid of elections and just say Oregon will only support Democrats.
One Party Rule worked great in the USSR.
I just saw “After Hitler” where Stalin setup puppet gov in all the Eastern Block Countries.
When the word went out, they all grabbed power at the same time.
Reminded me of what we are seeing now.
maybe better not to under estimate the democrats ability to rig elections and fabricate votes, because it works so well in Kalifornia. SCOTUS may need to get involved re the Constitutionality of states going outside the Constitutional Law of elected representative government. Are there any law suits filed yet against these rogue states that have already done this?
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.