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

Angleae

(4,801 posts)
6. The whole thing boils down to one question.
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 12:39 AM
Feb 2012

Can state law tell someone how to vote? I doubt it will pass constitutional muster in SCOTUS as it goes against the very definition of a "vote"

Recommendations

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

End the electoral college [View all] wilt the stilt Jan 2012 OP
Agreed. Here's a good mathematical case for why... Scuba Jan 2012 #1
The National Popular Vote Bill mvymvy Jan 2012 #2
It's completely unenforceable. Angleae Jan 2012 #3
Realities mvymvy Jan 2012 #5
The whole thing boils down to one question. Angleae Feb 2012 #6
Neither party will allow it to happen joeglow3 Feb 2012 #10
There are all kinds of constitutional problems with National Popular Vote. Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #14
Each state has a number of electors equal to its total Congressional representation Zebedeo Jan 2012 #4
Why must this compromise extend to the Presidential election? 2ndAmForComputers Feb 2012 #19
Sounds great, but not likely to ever happen Major Nikon Feb 2012 #7
National Popular Vote is not a constitutional amendment mvymvy Feb 2012 #9
That doesn't end the electorial college as the OP suggested Major Nikon Feb 2012 #12
National Popular Vote does not end the EC, but it does make every vote equal mvymvy Feb 2012 #15
And it's probably unconstitutional. Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #18
Would be great -IF... upi402 Feb 2012 #8
As long as you like having the interior states unpaved. nt Snake Alchemist Feb 2012 #11
No, we can't Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #13
NPV does NOT require a constitutional amendment. It is 49% of the way to going into effect mvymvy Feb 2012 #16
What stops a state from just not doing this, or Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #17
or if (say) Texas chooses to not participate, and declines to provide a popular vote count? Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #20
Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 6 of the United States Code Requires States to Report Totals mvymvy Feb 2012 #22
And what if Texas refuses? What's the remedy? Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #23
49% of the way to going into effect - Enacted by 3 jurisdictions among the 13 smallest states mvymvy Feb 2012 #21
I'm still not buying it Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #24
It would be a constitutional and administrative nightmare. Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #25
NPV achieves the goal of guaranteeing the Presidency to Candidate with most national popular votes mvymvy Feb 2012 #26
But it would be the popular vote of only the states in that 270 block Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #29
Winner of Popular Vote in ALL 50 States and DC gets NPV's enacting states' electoral votes - 270+ mvymvy Feb 2012 #31
I'm still not buying it.. again Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #34
see my post #13 of why this can't be done Motown_Johnny Feb 2012 #28
See Post #16 mvymvy Feb 2012 #32
Why? Don't you like a select group picking our leader for us? Rex Feb 2012 #27
It won't change much zipplewrath Feb 2012 #30
Any state that enacts the proportional approach on its own would reduce its own influence mvymvy Feb 2012 #33
About 76% of Americans and States are Ignored Under the Current System mvymvy Feb 2012 #35
When a presidential candidate spends more time in Iowa than California taught_me_patience Feb 2012 #36
That's a totally separate issue. The primary system is decided by the parties Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #37
Iowa was a swing state in 2008 taught_me_patience Feb 2012 #38
Sorry, thought you were talking about the caucuses (nt) Nye Bevan Feb 2012 #39
To answer your Q directly: "No, we cannot end it." Bruce Wayne Feb 2012 #40
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»End the electoral college»Reply #6