Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Gaugamela

(3,546 posts)

3. Not to pounce, but I'm pretty sure your solution would also require an amendment to

Reply to SleeplessinSoCal (Original post)

Thu Nov 10, 2022, 07:04 PM

Nov 2022

the constitution.

Another idea that is out there is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Basically, it’s an agreement between states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. The problem is that the number of total electoral votes between the signatory states has to rise above 270 for it to take effect, and at this point all the blue states have signed on and the total is 195. They would have to start recruiting red states, and that’s unlikely.

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

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

25 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Musing a solution to our anti-democratic electoral college . [View all] SleeplessinSoCal Nov 2022 OP

There is no solution, in that any solution would require a Constitutional Amendment brooklynite Nov 2022 #1

Triple the size of the house. Nt. carpetbagger Nov 2022 #2

that is a separate issue but also needs to be done. Voltaire2 Nov 2022 #7

that's not true. Voltaire2 Nov 2022 #5

And all the red states would refuse and we would do it ...so best case if no damage worst Demsrule86 Nov 2022 #9

The Interstate Popular Vote compact will never see the light of day... brooklynite Nov 2022 #14

Its at 196. Voltaire2 Nov 2022 #16

The point is: neither are likely. brooklynite Nov 2022 #17

well that is a new point from the point I responded to. Voltaire2 Nov 2022 #19

Not to pounce, but I'm pretty sure your solution would also require an amendment to Gaugamela Nov 2022 #3

it's not actually in the Constitution. just electors SleeplessinSoCal Nov 2022 #10

True, but Article II and the 12th Amendment lay out the process by which Gaugamela Nov 2022 #20

Not possible SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2022 #4

Not pouncing!!! This is a huge problem. The feds can step in if states aren't getting the job done. Karadeniz Nov 2022 #6

There is no solution until we get 67 votes in the Senate and can get 2/3 votes in the states. Demsrule86 Nov 2022 #8

Even worse SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2022 #11

Answer: The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact RedSpartan Nov 2022 #12

Never make it past SCOTUS n/t SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2022 #13

It probably would. brooklynite Nov 2022 #15

there actually isn't a constitutional issue as the constitution is remarkably clear Voltaire2 Nov 2022 #18

Con SCOTUS is making it so much worse. SleeplessinSoCal Nov 2022 #22

Why? BlueIdaho Nov 2022 #24

JMO SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2022 #25

I don't understand how it really works but would ranked choice voting at least dilute in2herbs Nov 2022 #21

No SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2022 #23