The League of Women Voters held its national convention in Portland, Oregon, on June 13-17. On June 16, the delegates voted to study “The advisibility of using the National Popular Vote Compact among the states as a method for electing the president.” The League does not taken a position on issues, unless it has studied them first. The study is likely to take a year, but if the study finds the plan worthy of support, then the League will help lobby state legislatures to pass the Compact.
The proposal was put forward by the League of Saratoga County, New York, and passed 363-273. Thanks to Paula Lee for this news.
Any attempts to change the electoral college outside of formal constitutional amendment are dangerous and foolish.
The net effect is that different states will be playing by different rules.
I oppose any changes to the current electoral college. A popular vote would require a national recount in the event of a close election, and undermine the federal nature of our political system.
Remember: we elect the President of the United States, not the President of the 300 million Americans. Election by states is most appropriate.
“The net effect is that different states will be playing by different rules.”
That is simply not true.
The National Popular Vote plan makes it 100% full proof that the candidate with the most votes will win. It’s as simple as that and the candidates will have to run a 50 state campaign rather than a swing state campaign paying attention only to a handful of states.
“‘The net effect is that different states will be playing by different rules.’
That is simply not true.”
It is true. In 1960, were the votes cast for the Democratic electors in Alabama cast for John Kennedy? They were under a set of rules that Richard Winger has suggested be applied retrospectively, but which were not those according to Alabama law, and understood by the voters of Alabama.
What if a State decides to have a popular election in October where the names of presidential and (vice presidential) candidates appear on the ballot and voters could vote for 2, to elect delegates to a State convention to be held on the 1st Tuesday after the 1st Monday in November, which would appoint electors.
What if a State decides to have a runoff in case no Presidential candidate has a majority. This is clearly permited under federal law.
What if a State decides to let voters choose individual electors?
Jim raises a lot of “what if’s”, but the fact is that the CURRENT system is one where different states play by different rules — and hs farfetched scenarios are based on more such differences.
The current system is indefensible, I believe — the founders were be absolutely horrified to see people complacently accepting a system where more than half of states and all their people are treated as irrelevant.
We have a history of states taking action on such matters — many states set up popular vote systems for U.S. Senate before the Constitution was changed. Many states established women’s suffrage. States are obligated under the Constitution to set up the best rules they can for allocating electors — the National Popular Vote plan is far better than the current system.
Because a State may change its voter qualifications unilaterally, there is the possibility of persons being eligible in one State who would not be eligible if they lived in another State.
Rob Richie points out the example of female suffrage, which effectively doubled the electorate in some States. For example, between 1888 and 1892 the total vote in Colorado increased from 81,000 to 91,000. But after female suffrage was instituted in 1893, the total vote increasted to over 190,000. If we assume a 50-50 split and similar voting patterns, then the result in Colorado alone cut roughly 10% off of McKinley’s popular vote lead.
Could one imagine an election for governor in which different candidate’s names appeared on the ballot in one county but not another?
Or if permanent resident aliens or 16 YO were permitted to vote in one county, but not another?
Or if there could not be a recount if the election were close Statewide, but could be if one county were close.
What if a State institutes IRV for the election of its electors? How will the NPV muddle with that?
How is it best for a State to set up the election of ITS electors based on how voters in other States vote.
Who won the popular vote for Democrat nomination for President in 2008?