National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 03:20:49 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: Could it actually succeed ?
#1
Yes
#2
No
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact  (Read 13885 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 09, 2010, 03:57:49 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

While wandering around Wikipedia, I found this pretty interesting initiative, or "how to get rid of the Electoral college without amending the constitution". Here I don't wont to start another Electoral College vs Popular Vote debate, we already have enough.
What I find interesting is having you opinion about whether or not it could realistically reach the 270 EVs necessary to become effective. Personally, I feel quite optimistical about that : More than 60% of citizens support it, five States have already passed it and 7 others could follow. The 270 EVs target isn't impossible to reach, and the procedure is far more simple than a Constitutional amendment : though a simple State bill.

What do you think ?
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2010, 04:19:14 PM »

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=36980.0
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2010, 09:13:04 PM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2010, 12:40:07 PM »


Well, but that one has no poll. Tongue


It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

This would make no sense. States are sovereign to choose the way they elect their Electors, passsing a bill against that would mean ruining the ewhole meaning of the Electoral college (thus making it even more silly than it already is).
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2010, 02:32:27 PM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.

How exactly would a piece of legislation override the Constitution?



I tend to support this, btw. Even if it'd make presidential elections less interesting.
Logged
zorkpolitics
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,188
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2010, 10:02:14 PM »

Given that the Constitution says:
"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.

How can this compact be enforceable without Congressional consent?  It effectively takes away the electoral votes of states not part of the compact
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2010, 08:35:52 AM »

It effectively takes away the electoral votes of states not part of the compact

Not at all. They still retain all the electoral votes they previously had.
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 13, 2010, 01:12:08 PM »

Isn't that sort of what the current system is?  Each state's electoral votes going to the one with a plurality of the popular vote?
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2010, 04:33:22 PM »

Isn't that sort of what the current system is?  Each state's electoral votes going to the one with a plurality of the popular vote?

Read about it again....
Logged
Citizen (The) Doctor
ArchangelZero
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,391
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 08:48:13 PM »

There's a lot of doubt in me that this would work, but it could, given that the required number (271) be reached within the next ten years.

However, such a situation isn't really a big possibility, and I feel that these measures have only been taken due to the Gore fiasco in 2000.

In conclusion, it could work, but it's not really necessary.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2010, 04:15:49 PM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.

This system wouldn't be activated until enough states with a combined majority of EVs ratify it. And once it gets ratified, it will essentially mean electing our President directly by PV. If this ever gets ratified and won't get overturned or ruled unconstitutional, except a formal repeal of the Electoral College to follow shortly afterwards. I don't see what's so scary about it, unless one of course supports the EC.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2010, 10:45:06 PM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.

This system wouldn't be activated until enough states with a combined majority of EVs ratify it. And once it gets ratified, it will essentially mean electing our President directly by PV. If this ever gets ratified and won't get overturned or ruled unconstitutional, except a formal repeal of the Electoral College to follow shortly afterwards. I don't see what's so scary about it, unless one of course supports the EC.

What bothers me is a popular vote without a runoff if no candidate reaches a majority. Non-parliamentary leadership posts, such as the President of France, face such a runoff. The EC provides for a runoff in the House. Even the constitutional amendment proposal of 1970 (Bayh-Cellar) to provide for direct election had a runoff provision is no candidate received 40%.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2010, 01:13:23 AM »

I'm not sure that a runoff of the type that Bayh and Cellar proposed is better than no runoff at all.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2010, 03:18:39 AM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.

This system wouldn't be activated until enough states with a combined majority of EVs ratify it. And once it gets ratified, it will essentially mean electing our President directly by PV. If this ever gets ratified and won't get overturned or ruled unconstitutional, except a formal repeal of the Electoral College to follow shortly afterwards. I don't see what's so scary about it, unless one of course supports the EC.

What bothers me is a popular vote without a runoff if no candidate reaches a majority. Non-parliamentary leadership posts, such as the President of France, face such a runoff. The EC provides for a runoff in the House. Even the constitutional amendment proposal of 1970 (Bayh-Cellar) to provide for direct election had a runoff provision is no candidate received 40%.

Anyways, no winning candidate has received less than 40% of PV since 1828.
Logged
Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey
hantheguitarman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,025


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2010, 05:19:37 PM »

It scares the hell out of me. Ideally, Congress would pass a law preventing this system.

If the electoral college must go, it would be better if we just abolished it. I won't support anything like this, however.

This system wouldn't be activated until enough states with a combined majority of EVs ratify it. And once it gets ratified, it will essentially mean electing our President directly by PV. If this ever gets ratified and won't get overturned or ruled unconstitutional, except a formal repeal of the Electoral College to follow shortly afterwards. I don't see what's so scary about it, unless one of course supports the EC.

What bothers me is a popular vote without a runoff if no candidate reaches a majority. Non-parliamentary leadership posts, such as the President of France, face such a runoff. The EC provides for a runoff in the House. Even the constitutional amendment proposal of 1970 (Bayh-Cellar) to provide for direct election had a runoff provision is no candidate received 40%.

Anyways, no winning candidate has received less than 40% of PV since 1828.

Lincoln received 39.7% of the PV in 1860, and in 1828, Jackson won with 55.9%, not less than 40%.
Logged
Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey
hantheguitarman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,025


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2010, 06:12:19 PM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2010, 06:40:34 PM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

Incorrect, it changes absolutely nothing. Every state still retains their electoral votes and they are all able to distribute them as they see fit.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2010, 09:03:45 PM »
« Edited: June 16, 2010, 09:05:50 PM by SE Legislator PiT »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

Incorrect, it changes absolutely nothing. Every state still retains their electoral votes and they are all able to distribute them as they see fit.

     While they do get to distribute them as they see fit, it seems rather disingenuous to me to say that it changes absolutely nothing. As Rochambeau pointed out, this would be essentially the same thing as replacing the electoral college with a nationwide popular vote; in other words, how the other states distribute their electoral votes would be rendered trivial. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference most of the time, but it would make a difference in elections like 2000.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2010, 03:11:33 AM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

Incorrect, it changes absolutely nothing. Every state still retains their electoral votes and they are all able to distribute them as they see fit.

     While they do get to distribute them as they see fit, it seems rather disingenuous to me to say that it changes absolutely nothing. As Rochambeau pointed out, this would be essentially the same thing as replacing the electoral college with a nationwide popular vote; in other words, how the other states distribute their electoral votes would be rendered trivial. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference most of the time, but it would make a difference in elections like 2000.

Still, the system remains identical. Each state will have a method for determining electors (in this case a majority going to the natinoal popular vote). That doesn't make any state any more irrelevant that it already was.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2010, 02:40:14 AM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

Incorrect, it changes absolutely nothing. Every state still retains their electoral votes and they are all able to distribute them as they see fit.

     While they do get to distribute them as they see fit, it seems rather disingenuous to me to say that it changes absolutely nothing. As Rochambeau pointed out, this would be essentially the same thing as replacing the electoral college with a nationwide popular vote; in other words, how the other states distribute their electoral votes would be rendered trivial. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference most of the time, but it would make a difference in elections like 2000.

Still, the system remains identical. Each state will have a method for determining electors (in this case a majority going to the natinoal popular vote). That doesn't make any state any more irrelevant that it already was.

     In theory the system remains identical. In practice it is being traded out for a nationwide popular vote, because the same system will now produce a result according to that criterion. It is like taking a soda machine outside of a gas station, stocking it with candy instead, & then insisting that the machine is identical & therefore nothing is changed.

     My point is that it may be the case that it in fact does not make any state any more or less relevant (though that seems highly doubtful). Any idea of the system remaining unchanged is a red herring, though.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2010, 08:24:42 PM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

^^^^
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2010, 11:27:52 PM »

This is quite a convoluted solution to fixing quite a retarded problem. Tongue
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2010, 03:13:34 AM »

This is quite a convoluted solution to fixing quite a retarded problem. Tongue

You summed it up very well. Wink
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 20, 2010, 05:40:17 AM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.

^^^^

Not any less relevant than states now that vote for the loser.

Actually, under this system, even a vote in Utah matters.
Logged
Sasquatch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,077


Political Matrix
E: -8.13, S: -8.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 20, 2010, 03:55:06 PM »

Anyway, I think this system is wrong, because if it gets passed (which I doubt it will), the states that haven't signed the compact are going to be totally irrelevant to the election.
Aren't 35 of the states already irrelevant to the election already?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 14 queries.