Skip to comments.Dissenters in GOP rethink Electoral College [Fred Thompson joins those trying to destroy it]
Posted on 06/03/2011 7:25:02 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
Popular-vote pact picks up steam
A once-sleepy movement that would upend the Electoral College, reverse two centuries of constitutional practice and elect presidents by direct popular vote has quietly picked up momentum in recent days, with Republican Party leaders scrambling to stanch a steady stream of defections by GOP state lawmakers to the plan.
Under the idea introduced in 2006 by Stanford University consulting professor John Koza, states that join the NPV compact pledge to give all of their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote - even if a majority of the states voters supported another candidate. If a group of states with an accumulated tally of 270 electoral votes - the bare majority - sign on, the practical effect would be that the popular-vote winner instantly becomes the Electoral College winner as well.
A rash of Republican state legislators have signed on as co-sponsors and even sponsors of this years spate of NPV bills. At a May 12 news conference, two prominent Republicans former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and former Gov. Jim Edgar of Illinois endorsed the compact.
Were perpetually kind of rolling the dice in presidential elections in this country and risking electing someone who didnt get the most votes, Mr. Thompson said at the event. Its an unnecessary risk.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
“Thats exactly why the left wants this. They want inner city thugs to control us.”
And if ever there was an issue that could break the nation apart into pieces — with or without a new civil war too boot — this is it.
“The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.”
This is why the “popular vote” movement will eventually fail as unconstitutional.
Because when a state chooses how its electors shall vote on circumstances that have nothing to do with the [same] state’s actual voters*, that shall become the “valuing of one person’s vote over that of another”.
*Making the determination of which electors shall be chosen — based on vote totals from OUTside the state in question (and not “of the voters of that state”).
I hope that when this does reach the U.S. Supreme Court, we still hold the majority. You already know how Kagan, Sotomayor, etc., will vote....
I saw through the FRaudster early on as well.
When I read “Stanford University Professor”, that was reason enough to dismiss his idea. Besides, the Founders intended that the Electoral College was a protection for states with smaller population. Otherwise California and New York could elect a President.
Yes, Fred Thompson is not the man you and many others thought he was. TN hasn’t a clue about the real liberal Fred. (Ditto Corker and Lamar! too)
Absolutely not true.
States may decide to apportion their electoral votes on any basis they see fit and does not violate an individual right.
The Constitution specifies only that the Federal government will guarantee a Republican form of government.
Letting the cities decide all future POTUS=Leftist power, forever! This is the definitive problem with getting rid of the Electoral College.
Palin like McPain is for open borders, something her backers seem to forget.
Something you may not be aware of: Fred Thompson is a protege of that old compromiser Howard Baker, who Nancy Reagan brought aboard to save Ronnie during Iran-Contra. Like Baker, Thompson is always jumping in support of liberal fads.
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
The states can choose their Electors any way they damn well please.
I thought all of those 2008 candidates did average in the debates; none excelled, but I have to say McPain did as well as any of them. Maybe that’s why the little Republican primary voters have to go with the frontrunners.
I do not agree.
A State could vote to give the power to appoint all Electors to the Governor...or, to be nominated by "an independent, 3-judge panel" for considerations by the Legislature.
A state is not required to conduct a vote AT ALL as a means of selecting it's Electors.
You need a Constitutional Amendment to take out the Electoral College.
Anything else is just corruption on a Grand Scale....
No, it isn't. BUT, SCOTUS has ALSO ruled that once a state allows its citizens to vote for electors, their votes are protected by equal protection under the 14th Amendment. Their votes MUST be valued equally as EVERY other voter.
This proposed NPV compact basically states:
The citizens can vote for electors within the state. If a candidate DOES NOT win the electoral vote within the state BUT DOES win the NPV, then that candidate WILL receive the electoral votes that the citizens of the state said that he WAS NOT ENTITLED to ...
So, the voters of this state DO NOT have their votes treated FAIRLY - since voters in the majority NATIONALLY determine the selection of electors for this state.
“In ‘08 he was never anything more than a stalking horse for McCain. That’s it. Worked beautifully, too.”
Exactly — unfortunately, many conservatives fell for the con, including many here.
Result: President Obama.
In 1970, this came up as a proposed amendment in Congress. It passed the House and I think it was on the verge of getting out of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Then, an obscure staffer for the Minority [GOP] wrote a dissenting brief that was sent to the Committee. The bill was tabled and NEVER brought to the Senate Floor for a vote.
He musta made a helluva argument ...
“I am steaming about my $2500.00 wasted and my support of him... ... **** fred thompson... the rat bastard.”
Should have listened to those who tried to warn you at the time, and there were a few...
You fell for the con — maybe you learned your lesson, maybe not.
“Good Grief! Wasn’t Fred a conservative once?”
NO. But as an actor, he played one in 2008.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."
--- Admiral Josh Painter - (Fred Dalton Thompson) Hunt for Red October - 1990