Skip to main content

View Diary: I Know You Think You Have a Constitutional Right to Vote - But You Really Don't. (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Perhaps I've missed something, but the gist of (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, elmo, yella dawg, Just Bob

    the diary repeatedly notes that the US Constitution does not guarantee Americans the Right to Vote.

    Upon close reading, however, it appears that what the US Constitution does not guarantee is the Right to vote directly for the Executive Office of President.

    Which means that These United States of America are not a Democracy (one wo/man = one vote). Which should not be news to anyone.

    The US is not and never has been a Democracy. It is a Democratic Republic which elects it's Executive by proxy (the Electoral College), and NOT by direct vote of the people.

    If you want to argue that we should become a Direct Democracy, then I'm all for that. But all that is necessary to achieve that is that (10 to 15) more States join the National Popular Vote Compact.

    The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among several U.S. states. States passing this interstate compact have agreed to replace their current rules regarding the apportionment of presidential electors with rules guaranteeing the election of the presidential candidate with the most popular votes in all fifty states and Washington, D.C. The agreement is to go into effect only when the participating states that have joined the compact together have an absolute majority in the Electoral College. In the subsequent presidential election, the participating states would award all their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, who as a result would win the presidency by winning more than half of electoral votes. Until the compact is joined by states with a majority of electoral votes, all states will continue to award their electoral votes in their current manner.
    The compact is based on Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide how to appoint its own electors. States have chosen various methods of allocation over the years, with regular changes in the nation's early decades. Today, all but two states award all of their electoral votes to the candidate with the most popular votes statewide.
    As of April 2012, the compact has been joined by eight states and the District of Columbia (see map); their 132 combined electoral votes amount to 24.5% of the Electoral College and 49% of the 270 votes needed for the compact to go into effect.
    The individual States pass a law in their State. It says, when enough States pass this same law, and their total Electoral College votes equal "an absolute majority of the Electoral College" then during the the next Presidential Election ALL of these States will cast all of their electoral college votes for whomever wins the individual citizens overall popular vote.

    Direct Democracy. Problem solved.


    "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization" -- me

    by Angie in WA State on Sat Mar 02, 2013 at 11:34:54 PM PST

    •  Well, that's a different issue. (4+ / 0-)

      The states are free to suppress the Federal vote in any way they wish to alter the outcome, rendering the selection of the President fraudulent by Democratic standards.

      If that is what the American people really want for their nation -- then I am behind them 100 percent. Anything is fair, as long as it is clear.

      I am merely seeking an intelligent and informed, non-cowering and fearless discussion about the reality of the situation.

      I would like all of us to be on the same page about the structure that determine our future.



      Denial is a drug.

      by Pluto on Sat Mar 02, 2013 at 11:50:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There has never been (0+ / 0-)

        a consensus regarding the structure you refer to and there never will be.  Get over it.  That's why we have the courts and people who spend a lifetime studying the Constitution.  All of the armchair constitutionalist with their pocket constitution just tend to dumb down the entire conversation.  Leave it to people that spend their entire lives studying the Constitution.

      •  States aren't free (0+ / 0-)

        to suppress the vote.  State constitutions can never offer less protection than the federal constitution only more.  The federal constitution is a minimum of guaranteed rights not a maximum.

    •  Exactly so (3+ / 0-)

      The Constitution leaves it up to state legislatures (themselves elected by the people of their state) to specify the method of selecting presidential electors. You would need to look at the constitution of each individual state and find no right to vote there before you could claim that there is no right to vote for presidential electors.

      The 17th Amendment provides for the people to elect their senators.

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

      And, of course, the Constitution provides for the people to elect their representatives to the House in Article 1, Section 2.

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

      So, in fact there is a federal constitutional right to vote for your Congressional representatives.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site