Here We Go... MASS Votes To Side Step Electoral College System

[007]

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College



July 27, 2010 05:09 PM

By Martin Finucane, Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

 

[bodecea]

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College



July 27, 2010 05:09 PM

By Martin Finucane, Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

And....?

 

[xotoxi]

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College



July 27, 2010 05:09 PM

By Martin Finucane, Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

And....?

Same question here.

 

[Oscar Wao]

So much for republic...

 

[Navy1960]

Article Two;

Clause2
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: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Article Two of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While not intending to insult the Mass. legislature , I wonder where the outrage is over a state stepping on the constitution as has been heard over and over here in Arizona. The DOJ was quick to run into the court making a claim on a Supremacy Clause violation , I wonder then should Mass. make laws that violate Article Two would the DOJ take them to court on any viloations of the constitution as well, it remains to be seen. The manner in which we elect a president can be easily addressed with a constitutional amendment if the states are of a mind that the current system is so unfair that it does not work anymore. Although I doubt that Mass. will take that road because they will find that the needed number of of states to ratify such an amendment at this point in time is lacking because small states are not of a mind to be slaves to the larger ones.

 

[007]

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College



July 27, 2010 05:09 PM

By Martin Finucane, Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

And....?

Same question here.

So what happens now? How do the votes get counted? So much from each state from the electoral college, and then... what? A bunch from Mass?

What they're trying to do is make sure that the cities elect the Presidents, where all the liberals reside. They're attempting to make sure that the bread basket of America, from which most conservatives hail, become irrelevant in Presidential elections.

Ya know... I've said there's another Civil War coming for years now. Shit like this just pushes us closer to it. Do you really think middle America is going to let the liberal likes of N.Y. and L.A., etc., simply DICTATE who the President is going to be? Not a chance. This is only going to create way more trouble.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This is very disturbing. Socialists/Progressives don't care about our Constitution. When is America going to wake up? It's time to give the Socialists/Progressives the boot. Shame on them.

 

[Greenbeard]

I wonder then should Mass. make laws that violate Article Two

That "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" bit from Article II you posted--that's this. Their state legislature wants to award the state's electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote

There's nothing even close to unconstitutional about that because the state legislature is specifically empowered by Article II to decide any way it pleases how it will appoint electors.

 

[Navy1960]

I wonder then should Mass. make laws that violate Article Two

That "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" bit from Article II you posted--that's this. Their state legislature wants to award the state's electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote

There's nothing even close to unconstitutional about that because the state legislature is specifically empowered by Article II to decide any way it pleases how it will appoint electors.

Within that said state the legislature can appoint those Electors as they see fit, however, if those electors are awarded as a result of popular vote not related to the said states results IMHO that is a violation of several articles of the constitution Article 2 included .

 

[Navy1960]

14th
2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Let me give you an example, for those that wish to reform the nation into a pure democracy. A candidate wins his or her states election for President or Vice President and yet they don't win those states Electors because of the results in other states denying those citizens their rights within their own state to select thier own candidate. One other side issue here is this, in a situtation where you have a national popular vote, then you have states that are perpetually at the will of larger states, thus rendering the whole concept of a Democratic Republic mute and that is not the nation that was founded called the Unted States.

 

[kyzr]

Why would MA voters vote? Their puny votes would be irrelevent.
"Under the law, which was enacted by the House last week, all 12 of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally."

I've seen "proportional votes" such as CO is considering
Proportional representation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"If it ain't broke...don't fix it". Whatever a few wacko leftist states decide to do is their prerogative. I can't wait until a conservative wins the popular vote, and would have lost if the leftist states' votes were actually counted. Be careful what you wish for...especially if you're stupid.

 

[Greenbeard]

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

This doesn't require an election for electors. It says that if a state holds an election for electors, the right of eligible voters (which, of course, was later expanded beyond just "male inhabitants") to vote can't be denied.

But again, Article II allows the state to decide how electors are chosen. An election for them is not required. Or, in the case of this proposed Massachusetts law, the results of the state popular vote--if there is an election--need not be the determinant of how the electors are chosen.

 

[Navy1960]

State Discretion in Choosing Electors .--Although Clause 2 seemingly vests complete discretion in the States, certain older cases had recognized a federal interest in protecting the integrity of the process. Thus, the Court upheld the power of Congress to protect the right of all citizens who are entitled to vote to lend aid and support in any legal manner to the election of any legally qualified person as a presidential elector. 69 Its power to protect the choice of electors from fraud or corruption was sustained. 70 ''If this government is anything more than a mere aggregation of delegated agents of other States and governments, each of which is superior to the general government, it must have the power to protect the elections on which its existence depends from violence and corruption. If it has not this power it is helpless before the two great natural and historical enemies of all republics, open violence and insidious corruption.'' 71
FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Article II: Annotations pg. 2 of 18

 

[Richard-H]

The electorial college is a load of crap.

Though I like the idea of forcing sanity on the electoral system, I can't see any state blantantly ignoring the votes of the people of their state.

I don't think that this will hold up.

Too bad.

On the otherhand, the very existance of the electorial college contradicts every sense of equality. I'm surprised that there aren't other basis for overturning the electorial college - some Constitutional clauses trump others.

I just don't think that the Supreme court has the balls to directly eliminate it.

 

[007]

This is nothing more than partisan, political maneuvering. With the election of a conservative in Mass to Kennedy's old seat, they're freaked out. So they're desperately grasping at anything they believe will give them the edge to hold on to their liberal power.

But how can Mass do this and all the other states play by the electoral college rules? How will that work? Shouldn't all the states be the same? I don't think what they're doing is constitutional, but then again, the liberals seem to be doing the Mexican Hat Dance on the constitution lately.

 

[Navy1960]

This is nothing more than partisan, political maneuvering. With the election of a conservative in Mass to Kennedy's old seat, they're freaked out. So they're desperately grasping at anything they believe will give them the edge to hold on to their liberal power.

But how can Mass do this and all the other states play by the electoral college rules? How will that work? Shouldn't all the states be the same? I don't think what they're doing is constitutional, but then again, the liberals seem to be doing the Mexican Hat Dance on the constitution lately.

If someone does a little research they will find out it's been a while since this thing has come about in a Court as to how a state make the choice of electors. Since about 1820 this nation has for the most part in every state selected it's electors through direct election within the state. In my opinion a state legislature has the right to decide how it's electors are chosen within it's state as long as those electors do not infringe on the rights of the voters, further a state that would go so far as to reward it's electors based on national election returns would be in big trouble in a court on several different Amendments to the constitution. Having said that, a state can choose to divide it's electors based on the popular vote within its own borders, or even go so far as to choose them based on the number or state house members and state senators all of which do not go outside the boundry of the state itself. What some people seem to think is the results of Presidential election in Fl. have anything to do with the results in say Tx. or NY or any other state for that matter.

 

[Annie]

The whole reason for the electoral college is to protect 'minority' rights, small or underpopulated states. To abolish it would lead to cities dominating the elections, ignoring the needs of the rest of the country.

 

[Nonelitist]

The whole reason for the electoral college is to protect 'minority' rights, small or underpopulated states. To abolish it would lead to cities dominating the elections, ignoring the needs of the rest of the country.

Just what liberals want.

 

[Douger]

Time for you kumpassionate kunservatives to go knock blow up that statue of Liberty.
It was a gift from France and poisoned your beloved District of the Knights of Columbus .