The Progressives, in their determination to neuter the Constitution and negate the protections built therein by the Founding Fathers, are seeking to strip out a vital provision: The Electoral College. As James Madison explains in Federalist #10,
America’s Constitutional Republic with democratic forms is designed to protect
individual rights and minority opinions from a tyranny of the majority, possible
in a “direct democracy”.
The Progressive Left is covertly trying to destroy this central pillar of our Republic under the guise of “Democracy” with an initiative called the “National Popular Vote Compact” or
NPVC. By sidestepping an essential provision of our Constitution, Progressives
seek that which they cannot obtain under the current open election rules, a
lock on the Presidency. And George Soros is providing the funding and the push.
As Sara Noble states:
“They plan to do this by eliminating the role of states, a protection written into our Constitution, and they are doing it covertly while in plain sight. The Progressive initiative is called the “National Popular Vote Compact” aka NPVC and their information is being spread nationwide via the Internet since 2008. They claim it is “true
democracy” but “democracy” to them is interchangeable with “socialism” and worse, as it was in the sixties.
They are moving state by state to bypass the Constitutional amendment process, relegating our SCOTUS to complete insignificance.”
We must act immediately as outlined below. Otherwise, with no public knowledge, no voter input, no public referendums and no input from states which object to this measure, this “Compact” would usurp the role of the states as safeguarded by our Constitution. It transfers
electoral votes to a “national popular vote” thereby usurping the role of the
states as safeguarded by our Constitution.
The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving each individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative voice in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.
If just a few more states pass the NPVC this bill will become law and the Electoral College votes of any state can be given to the winner of the national popular vote in a presidential election, rather than to the winner of that state’s popular vote.
If the electoral system set up by our Founding Fathers is
undermined all our Liberties are at extreme risk and this is exactly what the
Progressive Left wants.
URGENT! ACT NOW TO STOP THIS PROGRESSIVE ATTACK
First: Spread awareness through your network of contacts
Second: Watch for upcoming Action Alerts
Ask yourself: Is George Soros working for or against America’s freedoms?
The Electoral College is now the set of dedicated party activitists who vote for presidential candidates. In the current presidential election system, 48 states award all of their electors to the winners of their state.
The Founding Fathers in the Constitution did not require states to allow their citizens to vote for president, much less award all their electoral votes based upon the vote of their citizens.
The presidential election system we have today is not in the Constitution, and enacting National Popular Vote would not need an amendment. State-by-state winner-take-all laws to award Electoral College votes, were eventually enacted by states, using their exclusive power to do so, AFTER the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. Now our current system can be changed by state laws again.
Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution– “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . .” The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.”
The constitution does not prohibit any of the methods that were debated and rejected. Indeed, a majority of the states appointed their presidential electors using two of the rejected methods in the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 (i.e., appointment by the legislature and by the governor and his cabinet). Presidential electors were appointed by state legislatures for almost a century.
Neither of the two most important features of the current system of electing the President (namely, universal suffrage, and the 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method) are in the U.S. Constitution. Neither was the choice of the Founders when they went back to their states to organize the nation’s first presidential election.
In 1789, in the nation’s first election, the people had no vote for President in most states, only men who owned a substantial amount of property could vote, and only three states used the state-by-state winner-take-all method to award electoral votes.
The current 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in a particular state) is not entitled to any special deference based on history or the historical meaning of the words in the U.S. Constitution. It is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, the debates of the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. The actions taken by the Founding Fathers make it clear that they never gave their imprimatur to the winner-take-all method.
The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding the state’s electoral votes.
As a result of changes in state laws enacted since 1789, the people have the right to vote for presidential electors in 100% of the states, there are no property requirements for voting in any state, and the state-by-state winner-take-all method is used by 48 of the 50 states. States can, and frequently have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Maine and Nebraska do not use the winner-take-all method– a reminder that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not required to change the way the President is elected.
The normal process of effecting change in the method of electing the President is specified in the U.S. Constitution, namely action by the state legislatures. This is how the current system was created, and this is the built-in method that the Constitution provides for making changes. The abnormal process is to go outside the Constitution, and amend it.
I support bipartisan NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE! Every AMERICAN VOTER should
have a say in the selection of our President! COUNT ME TOO!
A FRIEND OF GARY’S (A NORTH COUNTRY PATRIOT)
STEVE A.