• Npvic

    From Sean Dennis@1:18/200 to All on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 10:45:00
    From:
    https://spectator.org/the-national-popular-vote-con-job/

    ===
    The Right Prescription

    The National Popular Vote Con Job

    NPVIC is an unconstitutional attempt by the Democrats to game our
    electoral system.

    by David Catron

    September 3, 2019, 12:02 AM

    The latest attempt by the Democrats to avoid the exigencies of the
    Electoral College is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
    (NPVIC). They have been selling this scheme as a conservative compromise between progressives who would abolish the obsolete institution outright
    and reactionaries who wish to preserve an inequitable and racist
    provision of the Constitution. In reality, NPVIC is just another effort
    to endow the heavily populated, Democrat-dominated regions of the
    country with even more political power than they already wield.
    Fortunately, it is doomed to failure. If you havent read the official
    NPVIC pitch, heres what it would accomplish, according to its official website:

    "The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes across
    all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill ensures that every
    vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election. The
    bill is a constitutionally conservative, state-based approach that
    preserves the Electoral College, state control of elections, and the
    power of the states to control how the President is elected."

    How would NPVIC achieve this miracle? There would be a formal agreement
    among various states controlling 270 or more presidential electors who
    would be required to cast their ballots for any candidate receiving the
    most popular votes across the country even if some other candidate wins
    a majority in any of the signatory states. A brief perusal of the
    current signatories to this compact will render its true objective all
    too clear. Thus far, 15 states and the District of Columbia have joined
    the movement, and all are owned and operated by the Democratic Party.
    Among them, they control 196 electors, and they boast that NPVIC will
    take effect when enacted by states controlling 74 more electoral votes.

    Here is the current list of NPVIC signatory states and the number of
    electors they control: California (55), New York (29), Illinois (20),
    New Jersey (14), Washington (12), Massachusetts (11), Maryland (10),
    Colorado (9), Oregon (7), Connecticut (7), New Mexico (5), Rhode Island
    (4), Hawaii (4), Delaware (3), Vermont (3), and the District of Columbia
    (3). There are seven additional states in which at least one legislative chamber has thus far approved the measure and another in which both
    houses of the legislature have approved it. If they pass the measure,
    the NPVIC states will claim the right to choose the president. This
    claim will conflict with at least two constitutional provisions,
    including the 12th Amendment, which states:

    "The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by
    ballot for President and transmit sealed to the seat of the government
    of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate The
    President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House
    of Representatives, open all certificates and the votes shall then be
    counted the person having the greatest number of votes for President,
    shall be the President if such number be a majority of the whole number
    of electors appointed."

    The 12th Amendment was adopted for the express purpose of preventing
    what NPVIC is designed to accomplish. This is why it begins with the
    words, The electors shall meet in their respective states. Its purpose
    is to assure that the electors of one state, particularly one with a
    large population, cannot influence those of another state. It was
    adopted in 1803 pursuant to the chaotic election of 1800 between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, which eventually had to be decided in the
    House of Representatives. NPVIC also runs afoul of Article I, Section 10
    of the Constitution, which is by no means ambiguous: "No State shall,
    without the Consent of Congress ... enter into any Agreement or Compact
    with another State ..."

    It goes without saying that these violations of the Constitution would inevitably produce an avalanche of lawsuits from the states. The ensuing litigation would certainly result in a Supreme Court battle that would
    be far more arcane than Bush v. Gore, and the inevitable ruling against
    the signatories to NPVIC would result in a Democratic reaction that
    would make their 2016 antics seem rational by comparison. Moreover, even
    if the constitutional issues raised by the compact could somehow be
    resolved amicably, there is virtually no possibility that the Democratic signatories to NPVIC would honor it if a Republican won the popular vote rather than a Democrat. As Professor Norman R. Williams writes in the
    Harvard Law Review:

    "[A] withdrawal from the NPVIC would violate the terms but the Constitution trumps interstate compacts and does so whether Congress
    ratifies the NPVIC or not. And, sure, other states will undoubtedly sue
    to compel the withdrawing state to comply but that lawsuit will likely
    fail for the reason just discussed. Even more importantly, the very fact
    that the presidential election would again be decided by the U.S.
    Supreme Court would again throw the nation into turmoil."

    All of this could be avoided if the Democrats were truly interested in
    one person, one vote. That goal could be accomplished without the
    convoluted process proposed by advocates of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The states could pursue reform by simply choosing to allocate their electoral votes proportionally. Nebraska and Maine have
    already changed their allocation systems to something approximating this method, and it involves no conflict with the Constitution. It would,
    however, reduce the electoral power that the big Democratic states
    wield. If California went to such a system, for example, at least 20 of
    its 55 electoral votes would go to Republicans. New York would face a
    similar electoral fate.

    This is why no Democrat-controlled state would dream of going to a fully proportional system. It is why they have concocted the unconstitutional
    and undemocratic National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. They arent interested in genuine electoral reform, and the claim that NPVIC is a conservative compromise doesnt pass the laugh test. They want to shift
    more power to heavily populated, Democrat-dominated regions and keep the electoral advantage they already possess in large states like
    California, New York, and Illinois. NPVIC is, in other words, just
    another Democratic scam to rig a game they cant win honestly.
    ===

    Later,
    Sean

    ... Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
    ___ MultiMail/Win v0.52

    --- Maximus/2 3.01
    * Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:2304 (1:18/200)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Sean Dennis on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 18:18:12
    Sean,

    The National Popular Vote Con Job

    Do we need this garbage?

    Changing the system whereby the popular vote in the USA will decide the presidency will always be rejected by the party who last benefitted from not winning the popular vote but winning the states.

    Don't give me the checks and balances hogwash, that's for brainless people.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99
    * Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)
  • From Sean Dennis@1:18/200 to Ward Dossche on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 23:04:02
    Ward Dossche wrote to Sean Dennis <=-

    Do we need this garbage?

    No. Absolutely not.

    It's just another scam being pushed by people who think we're gullible
    enough to believe that crap.

    Later,
    Sean


    ... All things are possible except skiing through a revolving door.
    ___ MultiMail/Win v0.52

    --- Maximus/2 3.01
    * Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:2304 (1:18/200)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Sean Dennis on Friday, September 06, 2019 01:26:09
    Hello Sean,

    The National Popular Vote Con Job

    NPVIC is an unconstitutional attempt by the Democrats to game our electoral system.

    by David Catron

    September 3, 2019, 12:02 AM

    The latest attempt by the Democrats to avoid the exigencies of the Electoral College is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
    (NPVIC).

    Mr. Catron should read the US Constitution before taking up his pen.
    States have every right to choose what to do with their own electors.
    As of today, the collective states need only 78 more electors to in
    effect make the electoral college system a thing of the past. The
    latest state to have voted in favor of adding to the list was Nevada,
    but the governor (a Democrat) chose not to go along, thus keeping
    the count at 78.

    So much for Mr. Catron's attempt to blame everything on Democrats.

    "The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes across
    all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill ensures that every vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election. ..."

    Gore v Bush

    The closest election in American history.

    GWB 5
    Gore 4

    Courtesy of 9 justices of the USSC.

    Who won the national popular vote?

    Al Gore.

    What we have in the USA is a far cry from direct democracy.
    We have a system that can be manipulated not only by an archaic
    electoral college process, but also by a majority of justices
    on the US Supreme Court, thus making both the popular vote and
    the electoral college process moot.

    Since not all valid votes cast in Florida were allowed to be counted,
    it can be said that Al Gore also won the popular vote in Florida.
    Since GWB was declared the winner based on incomplete results, he was
    not a legitimate president.

    But none of that matters, since "conservatives" are only interested
    in gaming the system to benefit themselves, rather than defend the
    people's right to vote (and have all their votes counted).

    The bill is a constitutionally conservative, state-based approach that preserves the Electoral College, state control of elections, and the
    power of the states to control how the President is elected."

    It is not the electoral college, but an electoral college process.
    Mr. Catron should really get his facts right. Or at least try to
    learn them.

    --Lee

    --
    Your Hole Is Our Goal

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Friday, September 06, 2019 01:26:21
    Hello Ward,

    The National Popular Vote Con Job

    Do we need this garbage?

    The electoral college process should have been ditched long ago.
    It is an archaic system designed for minority rule. Kind of like
    apartheid. Only a handful of third world countries continue to
    use this type of system. Why should the USA continue to show the
    world how backwards its own system is?

    Changing the system whereby the popular vote in the USA will decide the presidency will always be rejected by the party who last benefitted from not winning the popular vote but winning the states.

    The idea of "one man one vote" is used in every election *except*
    the election for president. And then only because the electoral
    college process is enshrined in the US Constitution. Why should
    Americans want to continue to use a system that is inherently
    anti-democratic? The very thought of doing so is un-American.
    At least in today's modern world.

    What the Framers of the Constitution had in mind, and what was
    originally ratified, was a Constitution that allowed only white
    men who owned property (including slaves) to vote, and then not
    even having the right to have direct democracy when it came to
    choosing their own president/vice president - or senator.

    Don't give me the checks and balances hogwash, that's for brainless
    people.

    What is the purpose of government? The sole purpose of government
    is control. The alternative being chaos. Which is what we have now.
    Courtesy of Donald J. Trump. Elected by a minority, with help from
    Russia.

    --Lee

    --
    Stop Workin', Start Jerkin'

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)