General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBetter than getting rid of Electoral college would be Statehood for D.C.
Pretending we wouldn't know what to call them because we already have a Washington state just isn't a good enough excuse.
ProfessorGAC
(65,010 posts)We need to test constitutional muster and challenge the winner take all element of it.
It would still serve the purpose intended and would require fewer defectors to prevent an autocratic populist from winning without winning the overall popular vote.
I went and read it and don't see anything in Article II that says the states must vote as a unanimous block.
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)Nebraska and Maine both split their votes. Just that Trump won all from Nebraska and one out of the four in Maine. There's nothing stopping states from doing this, but there's also nothing requiring them to apportion rather than winner-take-all. It's completely a state decision.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)What happened to the booth? And old school paper ballots?
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)My precinct has machine-read paper ballots where you fill in ovals.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)I like the old school curtains and booth kind
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)It was the first time for many. All people are entitled to privacy when there is a a possibility. Unless of course that is a luxury reserved for nondisabled people.
ProfessorGAC
(65,010 posts)Probably so, i guess. But, if it were done that way, it would prevent what just happened. And same in 2000.
They were worried that the big states would dominate so the went EC. Then Ohio and Pennsylvania were 2 of the 4 lever states and they are big states. And Michigan isn't exactly Montana or Idaho in population. So, really it's 3 big states that made the difference.
So, even that plan didn't work.
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)to force that method on states, and that will never happen. Same reason they wouldn't vote to get rid of the EC.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)To do it at all would be a matter of the federal government interfering with how the states conduct the individual presidential elections. I'm thinking that to try it at all would be opening a big, messy can of worms.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)I mean, I understand that it would get DC representation in Congress, but I don't see what that has to do with the Electoral College.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)moose65
(3,166 posts)DC has 3 electoral votes, so I assume they already have electors.
I'm in favor of DC having the same number of House members that they would have if they were a state. They should have a full voting member of the House, and they should also have Senate representation. Whether it's statehood or a special designation as a District doesn't really matter to me.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)three.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Dr. Strange
(25,920 posts)Vermont and Wyoming are smaller.
But you're right--still three electors.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)would be great.
raging moderate
(4,304 posts)And there's already a song for them: Columbia, the gem of the ocean!
Retrograde
(10,136 posts)in the District/State of Columbia. There were other towns in the district in the past - Georgetown comes to mind- but they all got amalgamated into one big administrative unit. And we already deal with multiple cities with the same name in different parts of the countries (and with two Carolinas, Dakotas, and Virginias for that matter)
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)think
(11,641 posts)briv1016
(1,570 posts)Same goes for Puerto Rico. (Though admittedly that wouldn't require an amendment.)
Initech
(100,068 posts)They deserve representing too!
DavidDvorkin
(19,475 posts)Statehood for DC and get rid of the EC.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)The reason why Congress explicitly has sovereign powers over DC is that the founders feared that if the federal government was located in any state, that state could in essence hold the government hostage.
It's the same reason that you can't arrest a legislator for anything said or written in Congress, or impede a legislator for anything except a serious matter (felony, treason, breach of peace) in going to or from session.
The exact provision is in Article I, Section 8 (Legislative powers):
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
Stop and think for a minute about why they thought this was necessary. If Congress were located in a sovereign state with its own legislature and executive, that state government would basically be able to hold Congress hostage by taxing and surrounding.
Think about Christie and Bridgegate, and now imagine that surrounding Congress.
You are a nice and intelligent person - don't let this election drive you nuts. There will be plenty more, and our chief honcho taking office in January is such an abrasive personality that even his own voters don't like him. They just wanted a change.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)At 3 Electoral votes a piece equals 90 EV.
Astraea
(468 posts)but the electoral college needs to go.