Posted on 04/27/2018 4:30:42 PM PDT by lowbridge
....I don’t believe this is at all Constitutional....
Thee Constitution has never stopped the commie left before.
If enacted it could be repealed or replaced.
There is nothing externally binding any state to it.
Throwing out the electoral college goes hand in hand with throwing out the bill of rights. We are not a democracy and were never meant to be.
Tyranny of the majority
But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
I would think subjecting the presidential vote to a national override would be abridging the citizens' right to vote.
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.
That’s it in a nutshell. If the idiots return their reps after the next election, they deserve what they get. I won’t give up my right to vote to someone in Califonia
This is a half measure solution, at best.
The EC was designed to equal one vote for each House District, one for each Senate seat and a few more for territories and DC...539 total; so need 270 for majority.
Best model:
For each House District, the EV goes to the winner of the popular vote in the District.
Foe each Senate Seat, the EV goes to winner of the popular vote in the State.
Territories and DC can be popular vote determined.
This model assures NO state is controlled by its largest metro areas, and further assures we will not be determined by the vote in NYC, LA, CHI, PHIL, STL.
In Ohio, for instance, popular vote would be controlled by the vote in Columbus, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Dayton, with Toledo as a margin. The rest of us would be left to the whims of the libturd cities.
Same goes for other states...MN, WI, MI, most of the NE states and the PNW states.
This popular vote crap at the state level is BAD policy.
We finally split the Senate even and are aiming for control of the House this fall (we're very close).
The libtards have finally run out of "other people's money" to give to their welfare base.
“States have the right to award their electoral votes in any manner they (the state government) decides.”
What if the state legislature decides to cast its electoral votes only for the democrat candidate, regardless of the popular vote?
Correct... and since only "blue states" are joining the compact, the only possible outcomes are:
1. All CT EVs go to the Dem who won the popular vote in CT, or...
2. All CT EVs go to the GOP candidate, despite the fact that CT voters wanted the Dem candidate.
There is no up-side for the Left and a potentially huge downside for them. It's stupid, it will never happen, and is purely an empty gesture... in other words, the usual Leftist nonsense.
They are free to do that as well... but it will likely be challenged in the courts... and those pols who pushed for that patently unfair system will likely be voted out of office, and the nonsense policy reversed anyway.
At least, that's if We the People are doing our jobs... but we are getting worse at that every passing cycle.
So, what they are doing is ignoring the popular will of the people of their state, completely disenfranchising them.
Thanks for reminding me about 1.10.3.
What them Dems won’t do - in this case Connecticut would be willing to say the hell with what her voters wanted and a candidate who got 80% of Connecticut would get zero EC votes if the other candidate won the popular vote....
Any State Legislature's power to appoint Electors any way they choose is absolute.
This travesty can be challenged and will lose.
The votes actually cast for the electors must prevail
Choosing Electors by having people vote is not at all required.
The people elect the state government. If they put in a government which will do that, then they already did decide to elect the Democrat.
If people do not engage in State Level politics then they have to a great degree ceded contol of Federal politics to those who are engaged.
Why are you attempting to assert that the consequence for irresponsibility and laziness equates to a systemic level flaw?
states have the right to decide how to allocate the electoral votes... which is why some states like Maine, actually can split and apportion them.
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.