The Daily Iowan, the campus newspaper for the University of Iowa, has this pair of op-eds. One advocates the National Popular Vote Plan and one opposes it.
The Daily Iowan, the campus newspaper for the University of Iowa, has this pair of op-eds. One advocates the National Popular Vote Plan and one opposes it.
NO uniform definition of Elector-Voter in the NPV scheme from Hell — regardless of the brainwashed MORONS hyping the scheme.
It is not a fair criticism of the National Popular Vote Plan that the plan contains no uniform definition of a voter, because the National Popular Vote Plan bills are all in state legislatures, and state legislatures obviously can’t pass a uniform definition of voter for the whole country. But the National Popular Vote Plan is the best mechanism we have to eventually persuade the nation to amend the Constitution so as to have a more rational and equal presidential election system.
What is to stop a State regime from having foreign enemies, children, insane folks and felons from voting for a Prez/VP ???
REAL Democracy State regimes can DEMAND an Art. V const amdt — to get REAL Democracy into the U.S.A. Constitution.
One is FOR or AGAINST REAL Democracy — sorry NO in-between stuff.
Against REAL Democracy = FOR monarchy/oligarchy = minority rule.
See 1775-1776 in the old Brit colonies. Stuff happened — allowing this blog to exist, among other things.
What is going on in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc. ???
#2 States could enter into a compact that: (1) provides a uniform definition of a voter for presidential elections; (2) provides a common set of candidates; (3) provides a common primary for nomination; (4) provides a single canvassing authority; and (5) provides a runoff procedure.
They could then exclude popular votes from states that don’t comply with (2), and votes from states that are not sufficiently compliant with the standards of (1), (4), and (5).
What you are arguing for is that states knowingly enter into an agreement that they know will not work in order to coerce passage of a constitutional amendment to avoid the impending train wreck.
# 4 SANE States have the definition of Elector in the State Constitutions — so that the party hacks can NOT play games with the definition.
Some MORON States allow the party hacks in the State legislatures to play party hack games regarding such definitions — durational residency, registration, etc. — limited — but NOT equal in ALL States.
Thus again – a const amdt.
UNIFORM definition of Elector in ALL of the U.S.A. — for the self defense of Democracy against the EVIL robot party hacks.
Equal ballot access in ALL regimes.
P.R. in ALL regimes.
Nonpartisan App.V. in ALL regimes.
Only a very thin line separates the U.S.A. from having the stuff in Egypt and Libya happen in the U.S.A. — but stay tuned for a quite possible U.S.A. regime shutdown due to the EVIL robot party hack gerrymander MONSTERS in D.C.