Comments on: National Popular Vote Compact – The mother of all unintended consequences

By: lazlo toth

lazlo toth — Sun, 27 Apr 2014 00:46:52 +0000

Constitution, Article 1, Section 10 (emphasis supplied):

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.

I just read the compact and I don’t see a good argument that it’s not states entering into a compact or agreement with other states, and Congress hasn’t approved this. So how is it even legal? The website completely sidesteps this:

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/answers/section.php?s=16

And uses the “impairment of contracts” clause to say states would have to comply (not true if the contract is invalid at the start). My observation isn’t original but are there any challenges being pursued under the compacts provision right now?

It’s funny because this would have meant that Massachusetts would have gone for Nixon in 1968 and 1972….

By: caseym54

caseym54 — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 18:28:14 +0000

Congressional districts can be gerrymandered. Maybe not so easy in Maine with its few seats, but in Texas, New York or California it’s common and trivial.

By: caseym54

caseym54 — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 18:25:59 +0000

Missing from your analysis is the Constitutional Compromise that resulted in the Senate and House apportionment schemes. The resulting EC tendency to call near-tie elections in favor of the candidate with the most STATES is not an accident. The election of 2000 was just as the Founders had wished.

By: fulldroolcup

fulldroolcup — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 18:24:46 +0000

Voter fraud counts, all the way down to the Senate and congressional district levels. A coupla Senate seats fraudulently won here and there, and you’ve got yourself a nice little criminal conspiracy you can call a “mandate”.

By: TugboatPhil

TugboatPhil — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:59:05 +0000

My county in southwest Virginia has changed from solid Conservative to about 60/40 in our favor. We are close to Va Tech and get some faculty, and retirees and trust fund babies from the northeast, and of course the “artists” who have taken roost here.

The major problem statewide is the ever expanding Feral Government that brings in leftist bureaucrats from all over. Much like the US as a whole, we are controlled by the more urban areas and parts of their suburbs.

By: bob sykes

bob sykes — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 12:20:13 +0000

Yet another argument for a return to the Articles of Confederation, which would eliminate the federal government and obviate this nonsense.

By: sdharms

sdharms — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 10:27:13 +0000

popular vote allows 2 wolves and a sheep to vote on what to have for lunch.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 04:42:16 +0000

anybody who thinks this is a good idea just stop! go back and read the federalist and anti papers again. the fallacy of this (democracy) was addressed already.

By: Juba Doobai!

Juba Doobai! — Sat, 26 Apr 2014 00:05:30 +0000

American law says that you must be in the USA as a legal resident with a green card for five years before you can apply for citizenship. Then, once you apply, you cannot leave the country until the matter has been resolved; if you do, you have to start the process all of again.

How is it, then, that Democrats expect newly legalized illegal aliens to vote without once more violating American law?

By: Doug Wright Old Grouchy

Doug Wright Old Grouchy — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:44:01 +0000

NPV could well result in the overall popular vote going to one person overwhelmingly and the EC Vote goes to the other candidate overwhelmingly. Would the NPV loser go down gracefully? What would be the possible recourse that losing candidate could choose?

While that outcome might seem unlikely, it could happen and IMHO would result in an uncivil discourse the likes of which we would never wish to see.

By: dmacleo

dmacleo — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:25:50 +0000

EC Votes is one of the few things Maine does right.

By: huskers-for-palin

huskers-for-palin — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:06:44 +0000

Just adopt the “Nebraska Method”. EV’s via congressional districts with the overall state winner winning the last two EV’s.

By: huskers-for-palin

huskers-for-palin — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:00:06 +0000

You’ll eventually need purple and red states to get this to “work”, fending off numerous legal challenges and the backlash of changing legislative bodies/citizen referendums who will try to back track this.

Imagine a race when a state decided to “back out” out of the compact.

Lastly, the swing states have no incentive to join this compact…..they get way too much money, favors and media attention as it is (just like the early primary states). Why throw it all away because some other states wants to drown out your votes with theirs.

By: bostonlegal

bostonlegal — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 22:58:48 +0000

All this because of Bush-Gore? Don’t they realize that the popular vote would have been totally different if that election had been based on the popular vote rather than the electoral vote? I don’t know if Bush or Gore would have won, but it likely wouldn’t have been anywhere close to the same result. I live in MA and I voted for Obama in 2008 — the only reason I did was because it was important my wife and any 3rd grader knew my vote wouldn’t have changed the result in Massachusetts. I’m not even sure I voted in the bush-gore presidential election… Perhaps the popular vote would give me a voice that I don’t otherwise have…. Still think it’s a mistake…

By: mumzieistired

mumzieistired — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 22:25:51 +0000

The Electoral College is like the World Series. Would we really want the winner of the series to be determined based on total points?

By: PersonFromPorlock

PersonFromPorlock — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:40:13 +0000

The interesting thing is that if Texas, for instance, joins the Compact, it presumably will – after suitable wrangling – gain the power to monitor elections in other states to keep fraudulent voting there from affecting the selection of its own electors. This allows for the delightful vision of Texan officials monitoring the GOTV effort in Chicago, a result that may not be what the Compact’s sponsors have in mind.

By: JimMtnViewCaUSA

JimMtnViewCaUSA — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:13:28 +0000

The comparison of Roman and Greek governance is apt.

You must not be a (relatively recent) graduate from the public school system. I don’t think teachers are allowed to cover things like this anymore.

By: dmacleo

dmacleo — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 19:08:39 +0000

its purposeful disenfranchising of entire states, yet asking for an id to vote is bad…
the irony burns my eyes.

By: Aucturian

Aucturian — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 17:45:08 +0000

Article IV Section “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,…”

We lasted this long because the Founders instituted an updated form of Roman Republicanism as a necessary check and balance against the changing whims of Greek Democracy and its violent propensity to elect tyrants.

This may seem counter-intuitive to the argument when there’s currently a tyrant in office. But we’re not longer a Republic if NPV comes to pass.

By: theduchessofkitty

theduchessofkitty — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 17:38:18 +0000

When the smaller population states no longer have rights, what are the people there supposed to do – take the abuse day after day?

The National “Popular Vote” initiative will only guarantee an eventual breakup of the country. I don’t think the people of these smaller states will take it lying down.