Popular vote to determine president may be law by 2031

[excalibur]

Unconstitutional. Period.

Imagine you live in state A and candidate X wins that state. But, some fecal matter "law" says uh-uh, we're giving your vote to candidate B because he won the popular vote nationally.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The popular vote compact for selecting a President is one closer as VA passed the law that allows states to create a mechanism that will deactivate the Electoral College

This is provocative act will cause dissension as well as tension in each of the major parties.

“The presidency should be won by the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide – not just the right combination of battleground states,” said Christina Harvey, Stand Up America’s executive director. “This brings us one step closer to a system where Americans’ votes for president and vice-president count equally, no matter where they live.”

According to a column by George Chidi, in The Guardian, "A national majority vote for president is one step closer to reality after the Virginia governor, Abigail Spanberger, signed the national popular vote bill into law, joining an interstate compact with 17 other states and the District of Columbia.

Under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, states would assign their presidential electors to the winner of the popular vote, regardless of the results within the state. The compact takes effect when states representing a majority of electoral votes – 270 of 538 – pass the legislation and thus would determine the winner of the presidential contest. With Virginia, the compact now has 222 electors.

Every state that has so far enacted the compact has Democratic electoral majorities, including California, New York and Illinois. But legislation has been introduced in enough states to reach the 270-elector threshold, including swing states like Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The legislation relies on two provisions of the US constitution, which would face intense legal scrutiny if and when the compact comes into force. Article II, section 1 of the constitution authorizes each state to appoint electors “in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct”. The constitution does not require states to even have a vote for president, never mind delegating those electors as a state’s voters choose.

The second provision, article I, section 10, clause 3 of the US constitution, governs interstate compacts. The text authorizes states to form legally binding agreements governing their relationships to one another. The text requires states to gain the assent of Congress to enact a compact. But longstanding US supreme court precedent holds that states only require congressional approval for a compact if the agreement infringes on federal power. Supporters of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact argue that the delegation of electors is a state power, not a federal power.

A Pew Research Center poll from 2024 showed that 63% of Americans would replace the electoral college with a national popular vote for president, with 35% opposing change.

“We’ll continue our state-by-state work until the candidate who wins the most popular votes is elected president and every voter is treated equally in every presidential election,” said John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote, an organization spearheading the legislation.


Stand Up America, which also advocates for a national popular vote, noted two out of the four US presidents of the 21st century – George W Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016 – lost the popular vote and won the White House nonetheless through the electoral college. Of the 60 presidential elections in US history, 10 others were near misses in which a small number of votes in a few states could have tipped the electoral college toward the candidate who lost the popular vote.

“The presidency should be won by the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide

Only if the voter rolls are 100% correct, photo ID is required and payroll withholding is eliminated.
Whatever taxes you owe are due, in full, the day before the election is held.

 

[BS Filter]

that will guarantee future presidents will be from either NY or California.

I wouldn't count on that, since both states are losing population and Texas and Florida are growing.

 

[excalibur]

California will determine the President then. No wants that except power hungry Democrats.

Why? See 2016. Hillary won the national popular vote by 2.9 million, but won California by 4.2 million.

In the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote by roughly 2.9 million votes (65.8 million to 62.9 million).

Data analysis shows that her margin of victory in California alone was over 4.2 million votes (winning 61.73% of the vote), which was larger than her total national popular vote margin.​

Google Search

 

[BS Filter]

“The presidency should be won by the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide

Only if the voter rolls are 100% correct, photo ID is required and payroll withholding is eliminated.
Whatever taxes you owe are due, in full, the day before the election is held.

I like that idea. If you owe taxes, you can't vote.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The popular vote compact for selecting a President is one closer as VA passed the law that allows states to create a mechanism that will deactivate the Electoral College

This is provocative act will cause dissension as well as tension in each of the major parties.

“The presidency should be won by the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide – not just the right combination of battleground states,” said Christina Harvey, Stand Up America’s executive director. “This brings us one step closer to a system where Americans’ votes for president and vice-president count equally, no matter where they live.”

According to a column by George Chidi, in The Guardian, "A national majority vote for president is one step closer to reality after the Virginia governor, Abigail Spanberger, signed the national popular vote bill into law, joining an interstate compact with 17 other states and the District of Columbia.

Under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, states would assign their presidential electors to the winner of the popular vote, regardless of the results within the state. The compact takes effect when states representing a majority of electoral votes – 270 of 538 – pass the legislation and thus would determine the winner of the presidential contest. With Virginia, the compact now has 222 electors.

Every state that has so far enacted the compact has Democratic electoral majorities, including California, New York and Illinois. But legislation has been introduced in enough states to reach the 270-elector threshold, including swing states like Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The legislation relies on two provisions of the US constitution, which would face intense legal scrutiny if and when the compact comes into force. Article II, section 1 of the constitution authorizes each state to appoint electors “in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct”. The constitution does not require states to even have a vote for president, never mind delegating those electors as a state’s voters choose.

The second provision, article I, section 10, clause 3 of the US constitution, governs interstate compacts. The text authorizes states to form legally binding agreements governing their relationships to one another. The text requires states to gain the assent of Congress to enact a compact. But longstanding US supreme court precedent holds that states only require congressional approval for a compact if the agreement infringes on federal power. Supporters of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact argue that the delegation of electors is a state power, not a federal power.

A Pew Research Center poll from 2024 showed that 63% of Americans would replace the electoral college with a national popular vote for president, with 35% opposing change.

“We’ll continue our state-by-state work until the candidate who wins the most popular votes is elected president and every voter is treated equally in every presidential election,” said John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote, an organization spearheading the legislation.


Stand Up America, which also advocates for a national popular vote, noted two out of the four US presidents of the 21st century – George W Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016 – lost the popular vote and won the White House nonetheless through the electoral college. Of the 60 presidential elections in US history, 10 others were near misses in which a small number of votes in a few states could have tipped the electoral college toward the candidate who lost the popular vote.

The Corrupt Democrat Party is destroying our representative democracy.
They writers of our constitution were geniuses.
They wanted to ensure that the small population states received equal representation.
The Democrats are trying to create a one party country.

 

[excalibur]

I wouldn't count on that, since both states are losing population and Texas and Florida are growing.

California isn't losing them fast enough to not sway a national popular vote.

 

[Eman623]

The popular vote compact for selecting a President is one closer as VA passed the law that allows states to create a mechanism that will deactivate the Electoral College

I'm not sure why you picked 2031 as the date the NPVIC could be law.

If anything, by 2031 it will be even further away from passing due to expected EV changes after the 2030 census. The following compact states are set to lose a combined 9 EVs.

• California: -4 seats
• Illinois: -2
• New York: -2
• Oregon: -1

This means the NPVIC will only have 213 EVs down 9 from the 222 they enjoy now.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

As a Dem I love the idea, which is exactly why it will never succeed. I think Trump was the first Republican president to win the popular vote in 20 years.

Actually there are 50 popular vote contests and Trump won the most.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The popular vote compact for selecting a President is one closer as VA passed the law that allows states to create a mechanism that will deactivate the Electoral College

This is provocative act will cause dissension as well as tension in each of the major parties.

“The presidency should be won by the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide – not just the right combination of battleground states,” said Christina Harvey, Stand Up America’s executive director. “This brings us one step closer to a system where Americans’ votes for president and vice-president count equally, no matter where they live.”

According to a column by George Chidi, in The Guardian, "A national majority vote for president is one step closer to reality after the Virginia governor, Abigail Spanberger, signed the national popular vote bill into law, joining an interstate compact with 17 other states and the District of Columbia.

Under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, states would assign their presidential electors to the winner of the popular vote, regardless of the results within the state. The compact takes effect when states representing a majority of electoral votes – 270 of 538 – pass the legislation and thus would determine the winner of the presidential contest. With Virginia, the compact now has 222 electors.

Every state that has so far enacted the compact has Democratic electoral majorities, including California, New York and Illinois. But legislation has been introduced in enough states to reach the 270-elector threshold, including swing states like Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The legislation relies on two provisions of the US constitution, which would face intense legal scrutiny if and when the compact comes into force. Article II, section 1 of the constitution authorizes each state to appoint electors “in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct”. The constitution does not require states to even have a vote for president, never mind delegating those electors as a state’s voters choose.

The second provision, article I, section 10, clause 3 of the US constitution, governs interstate compacts. The text authorizes states to form legally binding agreements governing their relationships to one another. The text requires states to gain the assent of Congress to enact a compact. But longstanding US supreme court precedent holds that states only require congressional approval for a compact if the agreement infringes on federal power. Supporters of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact argue that the delegation of electors is a state power, not a federal power.

A Pew Research Center poll from 2024 showed that 63% of Americans would replace the electoral college with a national popular vote for president, with 35% opposing change.

“We’ll continue our state-by-state work until the candidate who wins the most popular votes is elected president and every voter is treated equally in every presidential election,” said John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote, an organization spearheading the legislation.


Stand Up America, which also advocates for a national popular vote, noted two out of the four US presidents of the 21st century – George W Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016 – lost the popular vote and won the White House nonetheless through the electoral college. Of the 60 presidential elections in US history, 10 others were near misses in which a small number of votes in a few states could have tipped the electoral college toward the candidate who lost the popular vote.

I'm not an expert in election law, but I'm skeptical that if we ever reach a point where enough states pass this it will be found Constitutional. What I find interesting is how Democrats are trying to rig the rules in their perceived favor as opposed to asking why they lost in the first place and this isn't the first time they've done this.

You don't like rulings from SCOTUS, so your solution is to add additional judges you get to pick and pack the court. While the "Texasmander" made all the news this year, the "Hochulmander" in New York in 2024 went largely unnoticed as the Democrats tweaked a few districts in mid-decade redistricting which resulted in them flipping four Congressional seats Republicans had won by small margins in 2022.

I'm originally from Massachusetts. During the 2004 election, the Democrats thought John Kerry, who was one of our Senators at the time, would defeat Bush, so they changed the law so that we'd hold a special election for the rest of Kerry's term, instead of our governor, who was a Republican, being allow to appoint his replacement. Kerry lost, so it didn't matter, but when Ted Kennedy died in 2010 and the new special election took place it backfired on the Democrats because Republican Scott Brown won the special election, whereas the Democratic governor we now had could have appointed his replacement. After that happened, guess what the Democrats did? They changed the law back to governor appointment.

Your motives are very transparent and it isn't for some sense of democracy.

 

[berg80]

Unconstitutional. Period.

AI Overview

Abolishing the Electoral College (EC) requires a constitutional amendment, passing with two-thirds support in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of states (38 states). An alternative pathway is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), a binding state-level agreement to award electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, which takes effect when states with 270 electoral votes join.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

AI Overview

Abolishing the Electoral College (EC) requires a constitutional amendment, passing with two-thirds support in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of states (38 states). An alternative pathway is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), a binding state-level agreement to award electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, which takes effect when states with 270 electoral votes join.

It will depend on court interpretation. It's obvious to everyone that it's an end run around the Electoral College and they may deem it unconstitutional on those grounds. On the other hand, states are allowed to determine how to award their electoral votes, so the courts may rule in their favor. There could also be challenges against the state laws as well. If California votes 65% for the Democratic candidate and their electoral votes all go to the Republican candidate, people in California may sue over that. Things can get very convoluted, which is why I ultimately don't believe it's going to become reality.

 

[excalibur]

AI Overview

Abolishing the Electoral College (EC) requires a constitutional amendment, passing with two-thirds support in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of states (38 states). An alternative pathway is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), a binding state-level agreement to award electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, which takes effect when states with 270 electoral votes join.

There is no alternative pathway. Either amend the Constitution or the NPVIC is unconstitutional.

 

[berg80]

What I find interesting is how Democrats are trying to rig the rules in their perceived favor as opposed to asking why they lost in the first place and this isn't the first time they've done this.

The EC is an anachronism designed to convince small population states to ratify the Constitution at the time of the Founding. No other election on any level in the US or the world is conducted the way we conduct our presidential election. It's past time for it to go. You like it because it is rigged in favor of R's.

 

[berg80]

There is no alternative pathway. Either amend the Constitution or the NPVIC is unconstitutional.

The NPVIC would face a challenge for sure. And the R's on the SC bench would absolutely strike it down. But it's popular, it's the right thing to do, and it should be done.

It's time to abolish the Electoral College | Brookings

Darrell West discusses the history of the Electoral College and argues why the time has come to abolish it.

www.brookings.edu

 

[rightwinger]

that will guarantee future presidents will be from either NY or California.

One man, one vote
That is only 30 million votes total

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Do you think the weazels try to do this instead, because the majority of America knows this is dumb as fck?

No, per the polling that was posted in the OP.

63% support

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Only if the voter rolls are 100% correct, photo ID is required and payroll withholding is eliminated.

Nah, sorry.

 

[Billiejeens]

that will guarantee future presidents will be from either NY or California.

No, but it does mean that California and New York will be the ones that decide the election

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The EC is an anachronism designed to convince small population states to ratify the Constitution at the time of the Founding. No other election on any level in the US or the world is conducted the way we conduct our presidential election.

So what?

It's past time for it to go.

Why?

You like it because it is rigged in favor of R's.

Thank you for letting me know what I believe, Miss Cleo.