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

mvymvy

(309 posts)
3. Simply changing state laws
Thu Jun 29, 2023, 02:22 PM
Jun 2023

States with 270+ electoral votes combined are agreeing to award them to the winner of the most popular votes of all 50 states and DC, by simply again changing their state’s law.

The bill has been enacted by 17 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 205 electoral votes

State legislators in states with 65 more electoral votes are needed to enact the National Popular Vote bill.

Under the current system, the electoral votes from all 50 states are co-mingled and simply added together.

With National Popular Vote, the popular votes from all 50 states will be co-mingled and simply added together.


The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections,

Constitutionally, the number of electors in each state is equal to the number of members of Congress to which the state is entitled, while the 23rd Amendment grants the District of Columbia the same number of electors as the least populous state, currently three. No Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.


Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures, before citizens begin casting ballots in a given election, over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

The Constitution does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for how to award a state's electoral votes

There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents states from making the decision now that winning the national popular vote is required to win the Electoral College and the presidency.

It is perfectly within a state’s authority to decide that national popularity is the overriding substantive criterion by which a president should be chosen.

In 1789, in the nation's first election, a majority of the states appointed their presidential electors by appointment by the legislature or by the governor and his cabinet, the people had no vote for President in most states, and in states where there was a popular vote, only men who owned a substantial amount of property could vote, and only three states used the state-by-state winner-take-all method to award electoral votes (and all three stopped using it by 1800).

In the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 and second election in 1792, the states employed a wide variety of methods for choosing presidential electors, including
● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council,
● appointment by both houses of the state legislature,
● popular election using special single-member presidential-elector districts,
● popular election using counties as presidential-elector districts,
● popular election using congressional districts,
● popular election using multi-member regional districts,
● combinations of popular election and legislative choice,
● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council combined with the state legislature, and
● statewide popular election.

As a result of changes in state laws enacted since 1789, the people have the right to vote for presidential electors in 100% of the states, there are no property requirements for voting in any state, and the state-by-state winner-take-all method is used by 48 of the 50 states. States can, and have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years.

The normal process of effecting change in the method of electing the President is specified in the U.S. Constitution, namely action by the state legislatures. This is how the current system was created, and this is the built-in method that the Constitution provides for making changes

Now, Each political party in each state nominates a slate of candidates for the position of presidential elector. This is most commonly done at the party’s congressional-district conventions and the party’s state convention during the summer or early fall. It is sometimes done in a primary.

Typically, each political party chair certifies to the state’s chief election official the names of the party’s candidate for President and Vice President and the names of the party’s candidates for presidential elector.

Under the “short presidential ballot” (now used in all states), the names of the party’s nominee for President and Vice President appear on the ballot.

When a voter casts a vote for a party’s presidential and vice-presidential slate on Election Day (the Tuesday after the first Monday in November), that vote is deemed to be a vote for all of that party’s candidates for presidential elector.

Federal law (Title 3, chapter 1, section 6 of the United States Code) requires the states to report the November popular vote numbers (the "canvas&quot in what is called a "Certificate of Ascertainment." They list the number of votes cast for each, and are signed and certified by the Governor.

With both the current system and the National Popular Vote bill, all counting, recounting, and judicial proceedings must be conducted so as to reach a "final determination" by six days before the Electoral College meets in December.

Under statewide “winner-take-all” laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed in the Constitution, now used in 48 states, the presidential-elector candidates who receive the most popular votes statewide are elected.

In district winner states -- Maine (changed their law in 1969) and Nebraska (changed their law in 1992) - the candidate for the position of presidential elector who wins the most popular votes in each congressional district is elected (with the two remaining electors being based on the statewide popular vote).

In states enacting the National Popular Vote bill, when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538, all of the 270+ presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC).

Non-enacting states would award their electors however they want. Continuing with district or statewide winner-take-all, or enacting some other law.

The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 made the sixth day before the Electoral College meeting into a “hard” deadline for states to issue their Certificates of Ascertainment (whereas it was merely a “safe harbor” under the Electoral Count Act of 1787).

Each state’s elected presidential electors travel to their State Capitol on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to cast their votes for President and Vice President.

The electoral votes from all 50 states are and would be co-mingled and simply added together.

The Electoral College will continue to elect the President.

Recommendations

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

National Popular Vote mvymvy Jun 2023 #1
To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, "you go to the election with the Constitution you have" brooklynite Jun 2023 #2
Simply changing state laws mvymvy Jun 2023 #3
And as I said yesterday, you're not likely to get that either brooklynite Jun 2023 #4
Elections matter mvymvy Jun 2023 #5
I'll spot you Michigan and Maine... brooklynite Jun 2023 #6
State legislators and Governors Elections matter! mvymvy Jun 2023 #7
It could pass, but it could easily be struck down by the SC Polybius Jun 2023 #12
It has NOTHING TO DO with the Interstate Commerce Act mvymvy Jun 2023 #13
Not saying it does Polybius Jun 2023 #19
It violates the Constitution's prohibition on states having compacts or agreements with each other. former9thward Jun 2023 #20
Does not violate the Compact Clause either mvymvy Jun 2023 #24
Well here is the thing unless all states do it. I don't want to. I refuse to lose any election that Demsrule86 Jun 2023 #16
2024 Republican could win with more than 5% less popular votes than Democrat mvymvy Jun 2023 #25
Wisconsin just won a very important Supreme Court election...and they are likely to lose Demsrule86 Jun 2023 #15
When you find a way to flip... brooklynite Jun 2023 #23
The only states interested in doing this are Blue states Polybius Jun 2023 #11
State legislators in states with 65 more electoral votes are needed mvymvy Jun 2023 #26
Electoral College NowISeetheLight Jun 2023 #8
To abolish the Electoral College would need a constitutional amendment mvymvy Jun 2023 #9
Republican Tactic NowISeetheLight Jun 2023 #10
The "reasoning" for electoral college was to appease slave holding states groundloop Jun 2023 #17
I don't agree with your OP...I think we are going to do very well. Demsrule86 Jun 2023 #14
Agreed yankee87 Jun 2023 #18
Maybe, maybe not. Elessar Zappa Jun 2023 #21
Trump is in a one point lead in PA. former9thward Jun 2023 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Electoral College Ratings...»Reply #3