Skip to main content

View Diary: What nobody is addressing about the Electoral Vote-rigging scheme (180 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  It's a compact. 2 reasons. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam B

      1. Read the NPV website. It says it's an interstate compact. I presume they know what they're talking about.

      2. The law in each state says it doesn't go into effect until states with a majority of EVs have signed on. Each state's action is contingent on the actions of all the other participating states. I think that makes it a compact.

      "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

      by HeyMikey on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 08:40:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't this a moot argument? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Adam B

        As long as Congress approves of the compact? That still means a constitutional amendment would not be necessary.

        •  Would Congress? (0+ / 0-)

          Wouldn't the smaller states and many Republicans derail it?

          •  Well, you know (0+ / 0-)

            Hard to say. They would essentially put themselves out there as opposing the popular vote of the entire nation. Would they really put themselves out there like that, and how long could they keep it up before they get voted out and replaced by someone who won't stand in the way?

            •  Huh? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HeyMikey

              They'd be supporting their state's continued clout, as well as the partisan interests of the folks who elected them.  The whole nation doesn't vote on their reelection.

              •  I'm not trying to say it would happen (0+ / 0-)

                I thought the original argument was whether or not the NPV is a compact, which, you know, so what if it is, that doesn't make it unconstitutional. But in the end, we won't really know unless it gets implemented, because it would probably be up to the Supreme Court.

                •  And what I'm saying (0+ / 0-)

                  Your prediction about what Congress would do is likely wrong.

                  •  Yeah I can't claim to know otherwise. n/t (0+ / 0-)
                    •  Congress's approval MAYBE NOT required. (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      pierre9045, codairem, Cream Puff

                      From, you guessed it, Wikipedia:

                      Possible need for congressional approval

                      It is possible that Congress would have to approve the NPVIC before it could go into effect. Article I, Section 10 of the US Constitution states that

                      No State shall, without the Consent of Congress . . . enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power.
                      The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Virginia v. Tennessee, 148 U.S. 503 (1893), and several more recent cases, that such consent is not necessary except where a compact encroaches on federal supremacy.[41] Every Vote Equal argues that the compact could never encroach upon federal power since the Constitution explicitly gives the power of casting electoral votes to the states, not the federal government. Derek Muller, an opponent of the compact, argues that the NPVIC would nonetheless affect the federal system in such a way that it requires Congressional approval.[42] Regardless, supporters of the NPVIC plan to seek congressional approval if the compact is approved by a sufficient number of states.[43]
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                      "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

                      by HeyMikey on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 10:27:04 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  The ironic thing about the NPV approach, (0+ / 0-)

        in my humble opinion, and simple lay person's understanding, is that changing to the NPV controlling the outcome, will ultimately hinge on the LAST STATE to enact NPV allocation of their electors.

        As the NPV idea reaches about 200 electoral votes, the real fights will play out at the state level.

        2. The law in each state says it doesn't go into effect until states with a majority of EVs have signed on.
        That will take us right to the same issue we already have - where the ultimate NATIONAL outcome depends on a state level decision, in only a handful of states, or on state level conduct of an election.

        And I think it will mean that all the games for setting aside votes, challenging votes, and provisional balloting, etc. will become HUGE factors in what are now "swing states."

        The NPV movement, in its current form, is just a different all-or-none EC system.  And it means the outcome of the election may not be known for many weeks after the election.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site