Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator Bill Nelson Will Again Introduce Amendment for Direct Election of President
Ballot Access News ^ | December 23, 2008 | Richard Winger

Posted on 12/23/2008 4:37:28 PM PST by CalifScreaming

According to this story in the Tampa Tribune of December 22, U.S. Senator Bill Nelson will again introduce a constitutional amendment in January, to abolish the electoral college. Nelson had introduced it in June 2008 as SJR 39, but it made no headway.

SJR 39 is worded this way: “Sec. 1. The President and Vice President shall be jointly elected by the direct vote of the qualified electors of the several States and territories and the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States. The electors in each State, territory, and the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the legislative body where they reside.

Sec. 2. Congress may determine the time, place and manner of holding the election, the entitlement to inclusion on the ballot, and the manner in which the results of the election shall be ascertained and declared.”

(Excerpt) Read more at ballot-access.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 111th; billnelson; certifigate; electoralcollege; florida; nelson; obama; obamatransitionfile; socialist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: CalifScreaming
Sec. 1. The President and Vice President shall be jointly elected by the direct vote of the qualified electors of the several States and territories and the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States. The electors in each State, territory, and the District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the legislative body where they reside.

Sec. 2. Congress may determine the time, place and manner of holding the election, the entitlement to inclusion on the ballot, and the manner in which the results of the election shall be ascertained and declared.

Four reasons for why this particular proposed will never be adopted (not that there aren't more reasons):

1 - The balance struck by the Electoral College would be destroyed.

2 - Every Presidential election would have the entire country be one giant Florida.

3 - This proposal would allow the Territories to vote in Presidential elections.

4 - This proposal would transfer over to the Congress the authority the States have over Presidential elections.

41 posted on 12/23/2008 5:29:01 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DennisR

No it isn;t time to get rid of it. It is about states’ rights, and having a larger base of people candidates have to be concerned about, rather than just a few states or a few big cities.

And besides, since when has an idea that a whole bunch of democrats wanted been a good one? Why are you so on board to give them what they want? You think they know better about the Electoral College than the founders?


42 posted on 12/23/2008 5:34:32 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
It’s time to do away with the electoral college. And the sooner, the better.

Whyever do you say that?

The Founding Fathers had good reasons for employing the Electoral College, as opposed to direct popular election.

Do you know what they were?

Why are they no longer applicable?

43 posted on 12/23/2008 5:35:20 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r

This of course would require an amendment to the Constitution, a process which our Founding Fathers wisely made difficult. If they had not invented the Electoral system, a candidate could ignore the views of millions of voters in smaller states. He could campaign almost exclusively in the big states and major cities, and get elected. Voters who are residents of states such as Hawaii, Alaska, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana, Wyoming, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia, Delaware, Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire would be completely disenfranchised. If this were to happen, we would no longer have a republic of 50 sovereign states. We would have mob rule.

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) displays his ignorance of the Constitution and his lack of understanding of how our republic was originally formed.


44 posted on 12/23/2008 5:35:44 PM PST by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

1 word

ACORN


45 posted on 12/23/2008 5:45:15 PM PST by CalifScreaming (NO rubber screwdrivers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: CalifScreaming

He is a real moron. They could never get the votes from the small states to ratify.


46 posted on 12/23/2008 5:47:30 PM PST by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo

Senator Bill Nelson.... ready for the next Senate session
to Introduce Amendment for Direct Election of President.

47 posted on 12/23/2008 6:04:07 PM PST by Liz (The right to be left alone is the beginning of freedom. USSC Justice William O. Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it!

The 17th Amendment broke it. Need to start over, but that will never happen.

48 posted on 12/23/2008 6:08:51 PM PST by sionnsar (Iran Azadi|5yst3m 0wn3d-it's N0t Y0ur5 (SONY)|http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com/|RCongressIn2Years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CalifScreaming
The Constitution being torn up to fit Democrats.

Who cares? The Constitution has been dead for some time now. But dare I say you won't find one man in this country willing to fight for its return. Too many "risks".

49 posted on 12/23/2008 6:11:27 PM PST by dware (3 prohibited topics in mixed company: politics, religion and operating systems...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
"It’s time to do away with the electoral college. And the sooner, the better."

Certainly an elaboration of the justification of that that post/rationale is forthcoming.

Please ping me to it.

50 posted on 12/23/2008 6:17:31 PM PST by Radix (There are 2 kinds of people in this world. Those with loaded guns & those who dig. You dig.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: river rat

In the Congress we have today - there are NONE wise enough to question the wisdom of our founders..

NONE.

BUMP!


51 posted on 12/23/2008 6:19:22 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: laweeks
The only way you can prevent California and New York from deciding our presidential elections is the Electoral College.

I did some playing around with the NY and California numbers. You're shy about 6,762,007 people, based on this year's vote total. Make it California, Texas, and Nevada and that gives you 63,022,977 people, which tops the 62,612,951 votes needed to win this year's popular vote.

Granted, I'm going by population numbers of these 3 states, but it still makes the point that 3 out of 50 states could have given Obama the votes needed to win.

Under the electoral college system, it would take Cali, Texas, NY, Florida, Penn, IL, Ohio, Michigan, GA, NC, and NJ to get to 271. Obama missed that by 2, with Texas and Georgia being the exceptions.

11 out of 50 sounds better to me than 3 out of 50.

52 posted on 12/23/2008 6:35:31 PM PST by GOPyouth ("But we've got to have AIDS to pee in her eye socket!" - Beary Bear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CalifScreaming
Computerize the electors! (Hell, calculatorize them!) Since they vote predictably and only one way, don't ask questions (as they should have this year), get expensive the perks, who needs them?! An archaic, meaningless, ridiculous ritual. One Chinese kid with no knowledge of U.S. politics and no biases could do it with that:


53 posted on 12/23/2008 6:46:20 PM PST by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Regardless of what the Founding Fathers intended, I do not believe the foresaw the day in which a few states - CA, NY, FL, TX, OH, MI, PA - would determine who would become President/Vice President. It is flat out not right that a slight majority “steals” the votes of the minority. And that is what happens with the current electoral college. If each state had to apportion electoral votes based on actual voting, no problem. But for one candidate to steal the votes of the other based on gaining a slight majority is just wrong.


54 posted on 12/23/2008 7:04:18 PM PST by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DennisR

The majority “steals” the minority’s votes in every election. The majority wins and the minority loses. Abolishing the Electoral College won’t change that fact.


55 posted on 12/23/2008 7:29:26 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud

Bingo. A candidate winning 70:30 margins in the ten largest metro areas would win the election everytime. Meaning, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Detroit, Miami, Philadelphia, St Louis, Washington DC, and Atlanta. At an average of 8 million votes in each metro area, this means 56 million votes.


56 posted on 12/24/2008 4:16:47 AM PST by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
I do not believe the foresaw the day in which a few states - CA, NY, FL, TX, OH, MI, PA - would determine who would become President/Vice President.

Whoa!

Direct election by popular vote would give these same states even more leverage. They would represent an even higher proportion of the population and the vote than they do now, with the electoral college.

As it stands, because of the way electoral votes are distributed, high-population states are under-represented. And low population states are over-represented.

This is because every state starts with at least 3 electoral votes -- regardless of size (two senators and the minimum one Congressman).

Wyoming, Montana, North & South Dakota have only three electoral votes apiece -- for a total of twelve. Their combined population in 2000 was 2793K -- so that each electoral vote represented 233K population.

Indiana, by itself, also has twelve electoral votes...and a population over 6 million. Better than double the previous four states combined -- but Indiana has no more clout in the electoral college than they do. Indiana's proportion is one electoral vote for every 507K residents.

Then, we come to massive California -- 54 EV and a population of 33872K, a proportion of 627K per EV.

Thus, a vote cast in Wyoming (494K pop) is almost four times more powerful than a vote cast in California.

Another problem with direct election by popular vote is that it nationalizes vote fraud. As it is, the impact of the vote manufacturing factories in Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia, et al, is limited to their respective states alone.

But, with a national popular vote, they could produce "whatever it takes".

View the electoral college as a means of stacking the deck in favor of candidates who have some measure of broad inter-regional national appeal, rather than factionalized appeal to only specific segments of the population.

View it also as analogous to the World Series. It's not the team that scores the most runs who will win the Series. It's the team that wins the most games...

57 posted on 12/24/2008 8:09:18 AM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Something to consider:

Pennsylvania has two main urban areas -— Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

We elected a governor based on those two urban areas and all he did was pander to them with tons of money in order to get re-elected.

In other words, the red areas are paying to support the blue areas of Pennsylvania more than ever.

This is what would happen if we abolished the electoral college.


58 posted on 12/24/2008 8:21:51 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: tom h

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) would abolish a key feature of the Constitution, the limitation of the federal government’s power. Under the Constitution the federal government has enumerated, not unlimited powers. The states retain substantial power. That’s exactly what the founding fathers intended.

By eliminating the Electoral system, Nelson and other radical leftists would undermine the states’ sovereignty in favor of an all-powerful federal government. This fits well with socialism, collectivism, and central planning. Apparently Nelson and his liberal allies have learned nothing from the collapse of the Soviet Union or the horrors of other dictatorships, such as National Socialism under Hitler.

Or perhaps Nelson thinks socialism is best, as opposed to freedom.

It’s ironic that Nelson’s plan to abolish the Electoral system would disenfranchise his own constituents, the citizens of Florida.


59 posted on 12/24/2008 3:39:01 PM PST by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: CalifScreaming

As long as 13 states say no then he can introduce and congress can pass as many amendments as they want to but they won’t be adopted.


60 posted on 12/24/2008 3:43:40 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson