Skip to comments.Dick Morris: Democrats Conspiring to Rig Electoral College, Law Passed in 9 States So Far
Posted on 04/15/2014 11:40:27 AM PDT by Lucky9teen
A plan, now stealthily making its way through state legislatures with astonishing speed, would junk the Electoral College and award the presidency to the winner of the popular vote.
The plan involves an Interstate Compact where states would commit to select electors pledged to vote for the national popular vote winner regardless of how their own state voted. When enough states pass this law, sufficient to cast 270 votes which is the majority of the Electoral College, it will take effect.
So far, nine states and the District of Columbia, casting 136 electoral votes, have joined. This is halfway to the 270 needed to put the compact into effect. The ratifying states are: Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, Vermont, California, and Rhode Island.
Both houses in New York have passed it and it's on Gov. Andrew Cuomos desk.
It has already passed in the House in Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon. These states, plus New York, represent 107 votes. Combined with the others they are up to 242 votes. They need 270.
Who is pushing this?
All of those ratifying voted for Obama.
The movement is funded, in part, by the Center for Voting and Democracy, a George Soros-funded election group.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
This isn’t new....and its unconstitutional.
Not that it seems to matter these days.
What state would relinquish their power like that? Just stupid.
Soap box, Ballot box, Ammo box....
Amazing that all those states are Leftist states...
Constitutional? What difference does that make now? Politicians from both parties have been systematically dismantling various parts, with the most recent efforts of the Obama Administration to deal the “death-blow” to that founding document...
And the vast majority of school kids have absolutely NO comprehension of what the Constitution REALLY means - their textbooks have misrepresented a lot for years, and the new Common Core-compliant textbooks have thrown the Constitution (and anyone who still believes in it) under the bus...
Yep. The lefties (the few that actually know it) have always hated that we
are were a Constitutional Representative Republic, rather than a mob rule democracy.
and thus shall we no longer be a Republic, but a mob ostensibly ruled by “democracy”
remembering that Kim Jong Un, his father and grandfather and Saddam Hussein - all from countries with the title
“democratic” always get/got 99% of the popular vote
Just wait until a conservative gets the popular vote. HA!
Hey! I seem to remember a Dick Morris. Hmmmm. November 2012 sticks out in my mind...
Dang - I should have also said: “NC is firmly in GOP hands at the legislative level, so this is unlikely to go forward in that state.”
Remember 2000? If this passes, multiply Florida by 50.
The big city centers with most of the population are hives of vote fraud.
Conservative win the popular vote? Never happen again.
THIS + Shamnesty = Our Country is forever lost....
Unfortunately no. While we were not paying attention millions of Third World people were brought in and registered to vote. The balance has probably been tipped in favor of those people.
they are rigging so that the urban centers will control the election - the free loaders.
[ Remember 2000? If this passes, multiply Florida by 50. ]
In some ways I wish Gore had won the EC, he would have bungled up our reaction after 9/11 so badly the Dems as a party would have been destroyed permanently by 2004....
don’t shoot messengers
Nothing in the Constitution says how the states should pick their electors. Early in our history the legislatures of a some states picked them rather than by popular vote. South Carolina continued that until after the Civil War.
From Article II, Section 1:
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:
I think it is a bad idea because it would allow the Voting Dead from Chicago drive up the Democrat's national count. A better way would be to vote on electors by Congressional district with two at large for each state, so one district's "creative balloting" would only affect three electors, not all from the state or from multiple states. However, I don't see how it would be unconstitutional since the Constitution doesn't limit the state's selection method. They could pick electors at random or even flip a coin to see which party's electoral pool would be used.
[ they are rigging so that the urban centers will control the election - the free loaders. ]
Once that is done the unruly mobs of urbanites will be siced on the rural folks when crap gets worse...
The rigging will take place on the interstates where trucks will cease to run.
The problem is that legal voters in New York could determine the electoral votes for New Jersey.
I think if you eliminated every fraudulent vote (on either side), and outright ballot box stuffing, Morris was right. Just saying. Sadly, I don't think your ever going to have a fair election in this country (as it is currently constituted) again.
The Democrats will regret this move when Texas and Florida become Blue States sometime in the next 20 years.
Problem? Yes. Unconstitutional? No. There is nothing in the Constitution which would prevent the New Jersey legislature from passing a law saying "our electors will vote the same way as New York's" and just skipping the election altogether.
I understand your point except it could be said now that a Dem voter in a red state( like Texas) is disenfranchised
or a Pub in Calif
This if allowed to take hold would be the final nail
It is always for the same reasons, the rats own the big cities, and the right owns elsewhere.
You are right that the state legislatures can use any method they deem fit to select their electors.
But this is an interstate compact, which require the approval of Congress in order to implement.
And there are ways to play havoc with this. What is the “national popular vote”? There is no such thing.
Each state has a certified total. Were I up to havoc, I would stipulate that the winner of my state’s election would have 1 billion votes added to my official state tally.
Let them throw that into the mixture. Are they not going to use the numbers that my state declares as official? If not that, what? Numbers collected by the AP?
“What difference at this point does it make?”
Naturally it’s the completely wacko leftist states.
Maryland did it first.
Better yet, it doesn’t go into effect until enough states pass it to make a difference.
Otherwise Dems in Maryland could only loose from it, unlikely as that is.
Dick Morris LOLO, wa-da joke.
Had Enough Yet ?
Toe sucker trying to make money off a story that’s been bouncing around in the news for at least four years now.
So far, nine states and the District of Columbia — casting 136 electoral votes — have joined moving half way to the 270 needed to put the compact into effect. The ratifying states are: Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, DC, Vermont, California, and Rhode Island.
Both houses in New York have passed it and its on Governor Cuomos desk.”””
Yeah, the source isn't one of our favorite people, but still...
I had no idea that NM was thus throwing away its Constitutional rights and responsibilities.
But I guess I shouldn't be surprised that they are.
When's THAT ever stopped the left?
Funny, but I don't recall voting on this in the last election.
Good thing my elected officials are smarter & more caring than me and made the decision for me.
and even those who think they want that to happen will lose if it does
Could this be a way/means for Obama to claim eligibility for a new election under the new system, OK by the Constitution, so it would open a new gate for him to run for another two terms???
While it’s certainly not unconstitutional, I would think it would be very difficult for such an arrangement to be binding. If Massachusetts, for instance, decided that a Republican popular vote winner should not receive the electoral votes that Massachusetts should give based on this law, I would think it would be very difficult for a challenge to be made if the legislature of Mass. decided just to award the electoral votes to the Dem candidate.
Such an action would also be constitutional. The Constitution places no restriction on how a state legislature determines the recipient of a given state’s electoral votes. It merely says that the electoral votes shall be determine by a method determined by the state legislatures.
I also don’t necessarily think that the agreement to cast electoral votes for the popular vote winner actually represents an interstate compact, especially if the language of the laws is written carefully. For instance, a law stating that “The electoral votes in a Presidential election for the state of (INSERT NAME OF STATE HERE) shall be awarded to the candidate who gains the most popular votes nationwide. This provision shall take effect at such time as other states have passed similar provisions such that the total number of electoral votes allocated to the states that have passed these provisions represents a majority of the electoral votes at stake in the election.” It would seem to me that this is a law governing only a particular state’s electoral vote tally, not a direct compact among other states.
Another poster above, though, pointed out a real weakness in this popular vote agreement, namely the fact that there is no such thing as an official national popular vote tally. Any state who wishes to render such a compact ineffective would merely need to artificially inflate the popular vote total of one candidate in its certified totals. I can see no way of defining national popular vote other than as the total of the official state tallies. Therefore, any state has the power to skew the national popular vote to its own liking.
This pact among states is very clearly unconstitutional.
“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.”
Has Congress consented to this Compact?
If a state triggers this law, without having congressional approval, that state has violated the constitution.
I support the district method. Whoever wins a majority of the congressional district gets that district’s electoral vote. If no clear winner, hold a run off election 30 days later with only the top two candidates on the ballot.
The candidate that gets the most votes within a state also gets one of the state’s electoral votes. The candidate that wins the most districts within that state gets the other state electoral vote. If there is a tie with the number of districts, the Govener decides.
Yeah, the source isn’t one of our favorite people, but still...
I had no idea that NM was thus throwing away its Constitutional rights and responsibilities.
But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that they are.