Thread: National Popular Vote Movement

Electoral College Bills
2007 - 2008
Last updated July 2, 2007



Background
Each state has a number of presidential electors that is equal to the number of its representatives in Congress plus two. In all but two states, whichever candidate receives the majority of the popular vote statewide receives all of that state's electoral votes. This is commonly called the "winter-take-all system" for allocating electoral votes. Currently, only two states (Maine and Nebraska) do it differently. They use what is called the "district system" for allocating their electoral votes -- the popular vote is tallied for each of the state's congressional districts (CD), and the candidate who wins the popular vote in each CD receives that CD's electoral vote. The candidate who wins statewide receives the additional two electoral votes.


In 2007, 42 states are considering (or have considered) changing how they allocate their electoral votes. In most of these states, bills proposing that the state enter the National Popular Vote Compact (see below for more information) have been introduced. In twelve states, other changes have been proposed as well. These changes are generally either proposals that the state switch from the at-large system for allocating electors to the district system, or proposals to allocate the electors proportionally according to the statewide popular vote ("the proportional system").


The National Popular Vote Movement
The National Popular Vote (NPV) movement seeks to ensure that the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes nationwide is elected president. The NPV bills enter a state into the National Popular Vote Compact, and pledge that all of that state's electoral votes will be given to the national vote winner. These bills take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation. States with electoral votes totaling 270 of the 538 electoral votes would have to pass NPV bills before any state's bill would take effect.


To date, only one state has passed an NPV vote into law. On April 10, 2007, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley signed the National Popular Vote bill. The Hawaii Legislature also passed an NPV bill, but the governor vetoed it on April 23.


NPV bills are still pending in 8 other states. NPV bills were introduced but failed to pass in 21 states this year; bills were carried over to the 2008 legislative session in 10 states. Only 8 states do not have NPV legislation this year.
States that considered but did not pass NPV legislation in 2007 (21):
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming


States with NPV bills that will carry over to 2008 (10):
Alaska (SB 13
Hawaii (HB 234, HB 371)
Kansas (SB 150)
Maine (LD 1744)
Oklahoma (HB 1466)
Rhode Island (HB 5976, SB 201)
South Carolina (HB 4201)
Tennessee (HB 246, SB 159, SB 811)
Vermont (H 373)
Washington (HB 1750)


Other Proposed Changes to the Electoral College in 2007:
Alabama HB 407 (failed) - proportional system
Connecticut HJ 12 (failed) - memorializes Congress to repeal Electoral College
Indiana HB 1093 (failed) - district system
Indiana SB 263 (failed) - binds electors' votes
Kentucky HB 432 (failed) - district system
Massachusetts HB 633 (pending) - district system
Massachusetts HB 659 (pending) - district system
Massachusetts HB 3777 (pending) - district system
Minnesota HF 195 (carried over to 200 - proportional system
Nebraska LB 433 (failed) - eliminates current district system and switches to winner-take-all
New Jersey A 2785 (pending) - district system
North Carolina S 353 (pending) - district system
Oklahoma SB 457 (carried over to 200 - proportional system
South Carolina SB 159 (carried over to 200 - district system
Tennessee HB 1377 (carried over to 200 - district system
Virginia HB 2999 (failed) - district system
Virginia SJ 325 (failed) - create joint subcommittee to review Electoral College


States with no Electoral College Legislation in 2007 (:
Delaware (adjourned), Idaho (adjourned), Iowa (adjourned), Michigan, Minnesota (adjourned), Nebraska (adjourned), New Hampshire (adjourned), Ohio

See chart of pending legislation in some states at the link below.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/e ... 7-2008.htm

I'm sorry but I figure if every vote counts.....it would have to be by popular vote and not electoral votes. Always felt that way and one reason I quit voting for awhile.

If this ever passes, the country is DOOMED (not to say that it is certainly on a pathway to being doomed today).

Once we see a "popular vote" law, we will only see ultra left presidents.

Can we say "France". That is what the US will become. The people "stuck" in the entitlement free-be life, will vote to "get more" of the free-be goodies.

Out founding fathers were smart, when they designed the country the way they did. They built in certain "broken-ness" on purpose. Originally (and CORRECTLY), the house members were 2 yr and voted on by the people. The sentate, was 2 per state, for 6 years, and was appointed by the states. Well, that got fuxored up, and LOOK what we have today.

The broken-ness of the E-college has been one of the mainstays of keeping us from a total entitlement culture. Also, candidates have to actually go out, and promise (well, we all know how much that means, but it at least gets them out), to the country. If it is a pop vote, then there will be NO campaigning other than NYC, Chicago, LA, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, the Bay area, and a couple other large cities. Just look at what is listed. Bastions of ultra lib, entitlement culture.

It will certainly be game over.

H.

Moving to Other Topics.

Originally Posted by Husker

If this ever passes, the country is DOOMED (not to say that it is certainly on a pathway to being doomed today).

Once we see a "popular vote" law, we will only see ultra left presidents.

Can we say "France". That is what the US will become. The people "stuck" in the entitlement free-be life, will vote to "get more" of the free-be goodies.

Out founding fathers were smart, when they designed the country the way they did. They built in certain "broken-ness" on purpose. Originally (and CORRECTLY), the house members were 2 yr and voted on by the people. The sentate, was 2 per state, for 6 years, and was appointed by the states. Well, that got fuxored up, and LOOK what we have today.

The broken-ness of the E-college has been one of the mainstays of keeping us from a total entitlement culture. Also, candidates have to actually go out, and promise (well, we all know how much that means, but it at least gets them out), to the country. If it is a pop vote, then there will be NO campaigning other than NYC, Chicago, LA, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, the Bay area, and a couple other large cities. Just look at what is listed. Bastions of ultra lib, entitlement culture.

It will certainly be game over.

H.

Husker, you are absolutely right. Do you think there will be anymore campaigning where the candidates have to actually go and meet people. New Hampshire plays a huge part in the political process. If this were to happen- no more. Only those big cities would have a say. You think illegal immigration is a problem now? This would definetly make it worse.

Originally Posted by Husker

If this ever passes, the country is DOOMED (not to say that it is certainly on a pathway to being doomed today).

Once we see a "popular vote" law, we will only see ultra left presidents.

Can we say "France". That is what the US will become. The people "stuck" in the entitlement free-be life, will vote to "get more" of the free-be goodies.

Out founding fathers were smart, when they designed the country the way they did. They built in certain "broken-ness" on purpose. Originally (and CORRECTLY), the house members were 2 yr and voted on by the people. The sentate, was 2 per state, for 6 years, and was appointed by the states. Well, that got fuxored up, and LOOK what we have today.

The broken-ness of the E-college has been one of the mainstays of keeping us from a total entitlement culture. Also, candidates have to actually go out, and promise (well, we all know how much that means, but it at least gets them out), to the country. If it is a pop vote, then there will be NO campaigning other than NYC, Chicago, LA, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, the Bay area, and a couple other large cities. Just look at what is listed. Bastions of ultra lib, entitlement culture.

It will certainly be game over.

H.

I agree, if they legalize these illegal invaders and they go to a popular vote, this country is DOOMED.

I know several well-meaning people who think the popular vote is a good idea. Interestingly, it would help us with this illegal immigration problem. But I really don't know...the cure could be worse than the disease.

The Founding Fathers considered this, and they rejected it in Federalist No. 68. The reason was that they were afraid a tyrant could manipulate the public and sweep himself into power.

They were also afraid that more populous states would always win out over the smaller states. There are more voters in California than whole regions of America. Think about it: every president elected will either be from California or New York, or they will have promised excessive favors to these states for their votes. Places like Deleware will be left to die. After a few decades of perpetually playing second and third fiddle, the inevitable result is either a civil war or a succession.

Reading the Federalist papers now is to see an amazing politcal treatise, but it's also a little sad. We had a great foundation and a great government, but it's a testament that even the best institutions have fatal flaws: that is, the human element.

This may be a little controversial to say, but the spirit of America, the spirit intended by Jefferson, Jay, and Hamilton, died in 1864. Without Lincoln, there could be no FDR and there could be no George W. Bush.