On June 2, the Massachusetts House passed the National Popular Vote Plan bill by 114-35.
Comments
National Popular Vote Plan Bill Passes Massachusetts House — 7 Comments
12 more electoral votes would be nice. Anyone know the MA gov’s position on signing this leg?
I’m opposed to eliminating the electoral college. It is what keeps candidates campaigning thrughout each cycles swing states. With the popular vote, people will only campaign in large cities.
NPV does not advocate eliminating the electoral college.
The bill would take effect when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. The National Popular Vote bill does not try to abolish the Electoral College.
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities is only 19% of the population of the United States.
If the National Popular Vote bill were to become law, it would not change the need for candidates to build a winning coalition across demographics. Any candidate who yielded, for example, the 21% of Americans who live in rural areas in favor of a “big city” approach would not likely win the national popular vote. Candidates would still have to appeal to a broad range of demographics, and perhaps even more so, because the election wouldn’t be capable of coming down to just one demographic, such as voters in Ohio.
Electoral College = ONE of the 3 minority rule gerrymander systems in the U.S.A. regime — about half the votes in enough States/DC to get a bare majority of the EC Votes — 270 of 538 at the moment.
Such 3 systems have now caused the de facto bankruptcy of the U.S.A. regime — with the possible threat of the economic destruction of Western Civiization due to the accumulated govt deficits since 1929.
Uniform definition of Elector.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
#2, most smaller states are not “battlegrounds” so they are already ignored.
12 more electoral votes would be nice. Anyone know the MA gov’s position on signing this leg?
I’m opposed to eliminating the electoral college. It is what keeps candidates campaigning thrughout each cycles swing states. With the popular vote, people will only campaign in large cities.
NPV does not advocate eliminating the electoral college.
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
The bill would take effect when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. The National Popular Vote bill does not try to abolish the Electoral College.
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities is only 19% of the population of the United States.
If the National Popular Vote bill were to become law, it would not change the need for candidates to build a winning coalition across demographics. Any candidate who yielded, for example, the 21% of Americans who live in rural areas in favor of a “big city” approach would not likely win the national popular vote. Candidates would still have to appeal to a broad range of demographics, and perhaps even more so, because the election wouldn’t be capable of coming down to just one demographic, such as voters in Ohio.
Electoral College = ONE of the 3 minority rule gerrymander systems in the U.S.A. regime — about half the votes in enough States/DC to get a bare majority of the EC Votes — 270 of 538 at the moment.
Such 3 systems have now caused the de facto bankruptcy of the U.S.A. regime — with the possible threat of the economic destruction of Western Civiization due to the accumulated govt deficits since 1929.
Uniform definition of Elector.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
#2, most smaller states are not “battlegrounds” so they are already ignored.