General Discussion

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)

23. And what if Texas refuses? What's the remedy?

Wed Feb 1, 2012, 09:43 PM

Feb 2012

Send US marshals to seize the ballots at gunpoint and count them themselves? Put the governor and/or the members of the state legislature in federal prison?

And do you trust Texas anyway to give an accurate popular vote count in this circumstance?

No, NPV is a too-clever-by-half attempt at an end-run around the Constitution. If you want the Presidential election to be decided by popular vote, you need a Constitutional Amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

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