Maine Senate passes bill giving state's electoral votes to national popular vote winner

[BlindBoo]

Do we feel comfortable knowing that in essence, the 2020 election is guaranteed to Democrats by this manner

What other states can they add to get to 270 in time.

Ain't gonna happen.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Here are other cases where State laws were later struck down:
1. laws banning abortion
2. laws banning same sex marriage
3. laws on slavery where slaves were mortgaged and protected as private property

There is no provision in the Constitution that specifically gives the States the right to ban abortions or ban certain types of marriages.

LOL..

Really??

When did we repeal the 10th amendment?


View attachment 268605

You mean this one?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

I got it corrected.. but thanks any way..

Those case were decided by interpretation because there is nothing specific in the Constitution about them. Not so for choosing the EC electors.

The states EC electors are governed by the will of the states population. This will die a sorted death when SCOTUS rules on it. The state has no standing to disenfranchise ITS VOTERS...

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The states EC electors are governed by the will of the states population. This will die a sorted death when SCOTUS rules on it. The state has no standing to disenfranchise ITS VOTERS...

Let's hope you are correct.
The Scotus is still "government".......if you know what I mean.

 

[BlindBoo]

The states EC electors are governed by the will of the states population.

By laws passed the the State legislators. There is simply nothing in the Constitution that compels them to do so, or prevents them from using a nation wide popular vote instead.

 

[kwc57]

Conservative states are free to try their own compacts or to try rebelling in a Confederacy again

You mean the Democrats slave owners and rebels.

 

[hadit]

This issue will also eventually be decided by the court, which will allow the federal government to allow or prevent states from disenfranchising their own voters

I disagree. A ruling preventing the States to not choose their electors "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct" directly contravenes the Constitution.

States requiring concealed carry permits could also be seen as directly contravening the Constitution. Nothing is absolute, not even the freedoms therein expressly outlined. Believe me, if a state could be seen as deliberately depriving a minority candidate its electoral votes, even though said candidate won the state overwhelmingly, the feds would find a way.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

What other states can they add to get to 270 in time.
Ain't gonna happen.

One thing not clear, will the 15 or so states that have joined the pact still honor it if Trump wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college vote?
(unlikely, unless a TON of bench warmers on the Right who usually do not vote actually vote in 2020....which is unlikely)
If not, then this gives them an advantage....to turn the election according to the popular vote OR not.

Clearly, Democrats demand election by popular vote because they are sure they will always have a popular majority.
But the electoral college system was not designed for a democracy, it was designed for a Republic....and the United States (at last check) was still a REPUBLIC.
Obviously Democrats are eager to change that.

By eliminating the electoral college system, we flip from a Republic to a Democracy (or mob rule) and the voice of lesser populated areas is silenced not only in the election, but in representation.
Democrats are eager to achieve this. it flies in the face of the US Constitution. A Constitution for a REPUBLIC.

 

[BlindBoo]

What other states can they add to get to 270 in time.
Ain't gonna happen.

One thing not clear, will the 15 or so states that have joined the pact still honor it if Trump wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college vote?
(unlikely, unless a TON of bench warmers on the Right who usually do not vote actually vote in 2020....which is unlikely)
If not, then this gives them an advantage....to turn the election according to the popular vote OR not.

Clearly, Democrats demand election by popular vote because they are sure they will always have a popular majority.
But the electoral college system was not designed for a democracy, it was designed for a Republic....and the United States (at last check) was still a REPUBLIC.
Obviously Democrats are eager to change that.

By eliminating the electoral college system, we flip from a Republic to a Democracy (or mob rule) and the voice of lesser populated areas is silenced not only in the election, but in representation.
Democrats are eager to achieve this. it flies in the face of the US Constitution. A Constitution for a REPUBLIC.

The pact will not go into effect until enough states join and their total EC votes are 270 or greater. The legislation would not eliminate the EC nor would it change us from a Constitutional Republic.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The pact will not go into effect until enough states join and their total EC votes are 270 or greater. The legislation would not eliminate the EC nor would it change us from a Constitutional Republic.

ok. thanks
so if they can get enough states to join to achieve their 270, then they would be guaranteed a win.
but you say it can't happen?
Someone must believe otherwise.

it may or may not THIS election.
But it is clearly a move towards a Democracy and away from a Republic regardless.

while citizens still may not vote directly on laws, the move moves us a step closer to taking voting power away from certain groups. Once you start changing the foundation, the upper structure becomes unstable. this move by democrats destabilizes the process of representation imo.
And who knows what will come next?

 

[BlindBoo]

so if they can get enough states to join to achieve their 270, then they would be guaranteed a win.

The winner of the popular vote would be guaranteed a win. I don't think the Dems control enough state houses to get there before 2020.

But think of the Bragging rights if they did, and Trumpy wins again. Can you say "Historic Electoral College Sweep"

Hilarious unintended consequence?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The winner of the popular vote would be guaranteed a win. I don't think the Dems control enough state houses to get there before 2020.
But think of the Bragging rights if they did, and Trumpy wins again. Can you say "Historic Electoral College Sweep"
Hilarious unintended consequence?

lol
It wouldn't be the first time the Democrats plan blew up in their faces.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He will and it'll still be a bad idea and unConstitutional IF it makes it that far.

IMO, any legislator that voted for something like that should be impeached and fined.

What legislator(s)?

State legislators that knowingly and willingly failed to uphold the Constitution for the sake of partisan politics. I'm certain it could easily proven by coordinated emails. They all got together to do this across many states. That's a no-no.

Point to the applicable section of the constitution that forbids this action.

Do your own research on this.. You're way behind understanding the MULTIPLE Constitutional issues here.. Which not only include extra-legal circumvention of the COnstitutionally mandated EC college, but also violations of "state to state compact laws" without approval of Congress and likely infringement of several voting rights acts...

But it's really nasty betrayal to the VOTERS of their state that THEIR VOTES don't matter....

In Maine, we feel every single one of our votes matter, and by signing this compact, we know that every vote goes toward the majority that will win. We're a pretty purple state full of Independents, so it could go either way.

No you don't what if the state majority voted for the one who did not win the popular vote?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Sounds to me like a perverted form of voter suppression

Only an idiot would claim that the law endorsing the person who gets the most votes is voter suppression.

also sounds like a strong SCOTUS issue!

Because you don't like it? The constitution is perfectly clear. Each state chooses the method for appointing electors. Period. Get over it, snowflake.

Bad move... What if TRUMP WINS the popular vote? You gonna congratulate these mental midgets for their brilliant plan when NY, Cal, DC, and MAINE turn red on election night? It's naked power grabbing..

And I don't like it. But that doesn't matter.. What matters is that states cannot PRESCRIBE voting rules like that to their electors in the Electoral College. That's why you always get a few renegade electors that DO NOT FOLLOW the vote and end up voting for people either NOT on the ballot or who were never NOMINATED to run i in the general election..

You should spend more time understanding how things work and less time wasted defending ideas that are clearly partisan power grabbing... Stupid ideas that could backfire horribly on the conspirator babies....

Whether it's a bad idea is another question. I'm not a fan. Regardless, it's foolish to call it voter suppression or unconstitutional.

 

[emilynghiem]

He will and it'll still be a bad idea and unConstitutional IF it makes it that far.

IMO, any legislator that voted for something like that should be impeached and fined.

What legislator(s)?

State legislators that knowingly and willingly failed to uphold the Constitution for the sake of partisan politics. I'm certain it could easily proven by coordinated emails. They all got together to do this across many states. That's a no-no.

Point to the applicable section of the constitution that forbids this action.

Do your own research on this.. You're way behind understanding the MULTIPLE Constitutional issues here.. Which not only include extra-legal circumvention of the COnstitutionally mandated EC college, but also violations of "state to state compact laws" without approval of Congress and likely infringement of several voting rights acts...

But it's really nasty betrayal to the VOTERS of their state that THEIR VOTES don't matter....

In Maine, we feel every single one of our votes matter, and by signing this compact, we know that every vote goes toward the majority that will win. We're a pretty purple state full of Independents, so it could go either way.

Thank you OldLady
If you are going to go that route,
why not require the winner to get
the MAJORITY of POPULAR votes AND the most ELECTORAL votes.

And instead of run-offs, have PREFERENTIAL VOTING so that in case of third parties preventing a clear majority, the weighted votes would show who would win if the third parties weren't in the running.

But good luck with that, OldLady
You would still be eliminating any chance of THIRD PARTIES getting votes if everyone is scrambling to vote for either R or D to get one of those to win by majority.

So if TRANSGENDER people who make up a tiny fraction of 1% aren't allowed to be excluded for convenience of everyone else,
CERTAIN the Constitution, Green, Libertarian and other Third Parties that are already being shut out of the two-party biased system SHOULD HAVE MEANS OF BEING REPRESENTED AMONG VOTERS.

That's why I believe we are heading toward Proportional Representation by Party.

It's already discrimination enough against people of minority parties by the R and D parties.

What you are proposing would make the discrimination, exclusion and lack of representation EVEN WORSE.

Again, if LGBT can argue for equal inclusion, we should apply the same standards to argue for INCLUSION of minority party members.

That's the REAL problem that should be addressed here, if we are going to see MEANINGFUL reform of the Electoral system where EVERYONE would benefit from more fair representation regardless of party or size/concentration of voter populations.

 

[DJT for Life]

The States proportion their votes based on how their state votes.

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,"

Doesn't give the Federal government any power whatsoever in determining how a State appoints it's electors does it?

Within their state. Once they disenfranchise a single voter, it becomes a Federal problem.

 

[flacaltenn]

He will and it'll still be a bad idea and unConstitutional IF it makes it that far.

IMO, any legislator that voted for something like that should be impeached and fined.

What legislator(s)?

State legislators that knowingly and willingly failed to uphold the Constitution for the sake of partisan politics. I'm certain it could easily proven by coordinated emails. They all got together to do this across many states. That's a no-no.

Point to the applicable section of the constitution that forbids this action.

Do your own research on this.. You're way behind understanding the MULTIPLE Constitutional issues here.. Which not only include extra-legal circumvention of the COnstitutionally mandated EC college, but also violations of "state to state compact laws" without approval of Congress and likely infringement of several voting rights acts...

But it's really nasty betrayal to the VOTERS of their state that THEIR VOTES don't matter....

In Maine, we feel every single one of our votes matter, and by signing this compact, we know that every vote goes toward the majority that will win. We're a pretty purple state full of Independents, so it could go either way.

The whole proposal includes the possibility that large numbers of voters in Maine will be disenfranchised EITHER way the national vote goes -- because IIRC, Maine had PROPORTIONAL distribution of electors.. And this approach ENDS the power Maine voters had to have their DISTRICTS get an elector.. These have split MANY TIMES in the recent past... So those people are screwed and their votes tossed if it happens again...

And EVEN IF the 2 districts vote the same, and that does not MATCH the national popular vote --- THEY ARE ALL SCREWED....

Everything the Dems are doing is to gain and retain power.. They're backing this sinister and cynical end-around to a REPRESENTATIVE govt. They have instituted ballot censorship in Cali by DENYING access to the General Election ballot to any candidates but the "top 2" in the primaries... They are cynically PACKING and ATTRACTING all the illegals they can to blue states losing population and House seats...

EVERYTHING is maniacal manipulations of the voting systems to DESPERATELY shore up their failing party...

 

[Marion Morrison]

What legislator(s)?

State legislators that knowingly and willingly failed to uphold the Constitution for the sake of partisan politics. I'm certain it could easily proven by coordinated emails. They all got together to do this across many states. That's a no-no.

Point to the applicable section of the constitution that forbids this action.

Do your own research on this.. You're way behind understanding the MULTIPLE Constitutional issues here.. Which not only include extra-legal circumvention of the COnstitutionally mandated EC college, but also violations of "state to state compact laws" without approval of Congress and likely infringement of several voting rights acts...

But it's really nasty betrayal to the VOTERS of their state that THEIR VOTES don't matter....

In Maine, we feel every single one of our votes matter, and by signing this compact, we know that every vote goes toward the majority that will win. We're a pretty purple state full of Independents, so it could go either way.

The whole proposal includes the possibility that large numbers of voters in Maine will be disenfranchised EITHER way the national vote goes -- because IIRC, Maine had PROPORTIONAL distribution of electors.. And this approach ENDS the power Maine voters had to have their DISTRICTS get an elector.. These have split MANY TIMES in the recent past... So those people are screwed and their votes tossed if it happens again...

And EVEN IF the 2 districts vote the same, and that does not MATCH the national popular vote --- THEY ARE ALL SCREWED....

Everything the Dems are doing is to gain and retain power.. They're backing this sinister and cynical end-around to a REPRESENTATIVE govt. They have instituted ballot censorship in Cali by DENYING access to the General Election ballot to any candidates but the "top 2" in the primaries... They are cynically PACKING and ATTRACTING all the illegals they can to blue states losing population and House seats...

EVERYTHING is maniacal manipulations of the voting systems to DESPERATELY shore up their failing party...

That's the way I see it: It's an end-around. Not sure what's going to become of those representatives' actions.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Sounds to me like a perverted form of voter suppression....no matter how the state votes its legislature gives its electoral votes to the person who at the end of voting wins the popular vote throughout the entire country....also sounds like a strong SCOTUS issue!

Maine's lawmakers passed a bill that would give the state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who won the national popular vote, taking a step toward becoming the 15th state to enact such a law. The Maine Senate voted 19-16 Tuesday to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would give all committed states' electoral votes to the winning popular vote candidate should the group accrue the 270 votes necessary for a majority.

California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and the District of Columbia have all committed to the pact. The most recent addition, New Mexico, put the total at 189 electoral votes....I believe those listed states are all DeathRAT controlled states!

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...

Tissue?

States entering into a compact with one another is unConstitutional, and clearly this is an organized compact.


"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."

Article I, Section 10, Clause 3

Uh-Oh! National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

Constitution of the United States - We the People

 

[Marion Morrison]

You want I want to see? I want to see the framers of this thing and the legislators that voted for it hammered right into the ground. Removed from office, fined, and given 1 year in the Federal pen for sedition.

 

[OldLady]

What legislator(s)?

State legislators that knowingly and willingly failed to uphold the Constitution for the sake of partisan politics. I'm certain it could easily proven by coordinated emails. They all got together to do this across many states. That's a no-no.

Point to the applicable section of the constitution that forbids this action.

Do your own research on this.. You're way behind understanding the MULTIPLE Constitutional issues here.. Which not only include extra-legal circumvention of the COnstitutionally mandated EC college, but also violations of "state to state compact laws" without approval of Congress and likely infringement of several voting rights acts...

But it's really nasty betrayal to the VOTERS of their state that THEIR VOTES don't matter....

In Maine, we feel every single one of our votes matter, and by signing this compact, we know that every vote goes toward the majority that will win. We're a pretty purple state full of Independents, so it could go either way.

Thank you OldLady
If you are going to go that route,
why not require the winner to get
the MAJORITY of POPULAR votes AND the most ELECTORAL votes.

And instead of run-offs, have PREFERENTIAL VOTING so that in case of third parties preventing a clear majority, the weighted votes would show who would win if the third parties weren't in the running.

But good luck with that, OldLady
You would still be eliminating any chance of THIRD PARTIES getting votes if everyone is scrambling to vote for either R or D to get one of those to win by majority.

So if TRANSGENDER people who make up a tiny fraction of 1% aren't allowed to be excluded for convenience of everyone else,
CERTAIN the Constitution, Green, Libertarian and other Third Parties that are already being shut out of the two-party biased system SHOULD HAVE MEANS OF BEING REPRESENTED AMONG VOTERS.

That's why I believe we are heading toward Proportional Representation by Party.

It's already discrimination enough against people of minority parties by the R and D parties.

What you are proposing would make the discrimination, exclusion and lack of representation EVEN WORSE.

Again, if LGBT can argue for equal inclusion, we should apply the same standards to argue for INCLUSION of minority party members.

That's the REAL problem that should be addressed here, if we are going to see MEANINGFUL reform of the Electoral system where EVERYONE would benefit from more fair representation regardless of party or size/concentration of voter populations.

Em, Maine is trying to expand ranked choice voting to the President as well. I guess we have to change a word in our state Constitution first. Because there are so many Independents in Maine, we think it is more fair than a simple majority, which you are right does favor the two party system.

That's all I can tell ya.