Posted on 08/09/2011 4:02:37 PM PDT by Lmo56
Golden State legislature says it will give its states electoral votes to the national popular vote winner.
Providing a significant boost to an effort to end-around the Electoral College, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation on Monday that would award the Golden State’s 55 electoral votes to the presidential candidate garnering the most votes nationwide.
California, which has more electoral votes than any other state in the nation, is the eighth state to join the National Popular Vote compact, an effort to end the Electoral College's role in picking presidents.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
TOTALLY agree with district method - with remaining 2 votes going to winner of popular vote within the state.
It is the fairest method ...
Don’t assume the democrats have simply overlooked the possibility that a republican can win.
When they tried it in Michigan they wrote an opt out clause into the bill that would allow them to opt out 6 months before an election.
Basically, if it looked like a republican might win, they could force him to collect electoral votes the old fashioned way.
Jerry Brown fiddles while the California economy burns.
I’m not sure that I see the Constitutional difficulty. The Constitution never indicates how the electors should be chosen, other than that the states have the right to choose them. Article II Section 1 says “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 14th Amendment mentions electors, but only in the context of when they are chosen by popular vote within a state. The electors can be nominated by the governor, names picked out of a hat, whatever — as long as the correct number of electors are chosen.
Not trying to be argumentative, I just really don’t see where the Constitutional issue is. The electors will, by necessity, be faithless, but that’s not actually unconstitutional, as far as I can tell.
They are just trying to ruin the Constitution and US government.
We should go back to the state legislatures picking the Senators....Repeal the 17th Amendment.
That was also a Communist/Marxist move to destroy the separation of powers....so they could get total central control. It took them awhile....FDR helped a ton with the Court....and look at the communist bambi whom he placed on the Court and Congress allowed them to be confirmed. Sickening.
We have been set up.
Google and read Bush v. Gore ...
State has the exclusive, unalterable, and uninterferable right to select method of choosing electors.
BUT, if it chooses to allow it's citizens to select it's electors, then the state CANNOT infringe on the voters' 14 Amendment Equal Protection rights by valuing one voter's vote over another.
In this case, the state would value the votes of the OTHER 49 states plus the minority within the state, if the NPV goes the other way ...
Bet I can guess what that pervert Brown is fiddling with....
That's something I thought for years... the Republicans have lots of paths to the White House without California's 55 or so EVs... but the Democrats have NONE. I've always thought we should focus a LOT harder on winning California, because without it, the Democrats literally have *no* chance in a Presidential election.
Despite the arguments that a State can decide on its electors, this is certainly against the spirit of the Constitution. It has the State precommitted not to the election-day will of its populace, but to the outcome of a nationwide voter tally. That will give an immense weight to the cumulative effect of party machine fraud, which I believe has been mostly Democratic and centered in big cities, like Chicago, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia.
Instead of fraud being somewhat isolated by state, it will have a cumulative national effect. It will make every fake vote count. Very bad idea.
“Nah, if an R wins it, they’ll have an emergency meeting and recind the “law”. That’s how they do things.”
You can take that to the bank.
By my estimation, the states that have already passed it have 124 electoral votes locked up for most likely democrats.
There are always unintended consequences in the wake of progressive brainstorms. This is truly one to be hoped for.
>>> Jerry Brown fiddles while the California economy burns.
you’ll like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgG0rdWJAJY
This will last until the first time a Republican wins the national popular vote.
I just really don’t see where the Constitutional issue is.
*****
READ Bush v. Gore - dammit !!!
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html
Section II B - First AND Second paragraphs ...
Sarah, can you not hear all our voices asking you to PLEASE save us from this take over?!?!?!?
If there is a GOD in heaven he will make it so.
Absolutely right. The state chooses how it awards electors.
“I think California is going to regret this in 2012...”
Concur. This could only hurt democrats.
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.