Theodore's World: Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!??!!

« Howard Dean Calls Fox News Racist, Chris Wallace Strikes Back | Main | Vlad Putin Rides His Harley Into Biker Rally »

July 26, 2010

Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!??!!

Guess what part of the Constitution goes next!

Drastic change in works to revamp whole Electoral College


Democrats have found yet another way to circumvent the U.S. Constitution: Bypass the Electoral College and elect a president by popular vote without first passing an amendment to the founding document, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

The Massachusetts Senate has joined five other states in passing a National Popular Vote bill to do just that. It approved the legislation July 15 by a margin of 28-10.

The National Popular Vote, which already passed the Massachusetts House, is within one final "enactment vote" in the Massachusetts Senate before the measure can be ready for the governor's signature, the Boston Globe reported.
"Under the proposed law, all 12 of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally," according to the report.

"The idea is that Massachusetts will instruct its electors in the Electoral College to vote for the candidate receiving the majority of presidential election votes nationally, regardless of how the state's own voters cast their ballots," Corsi explained.

The Massachusetts National Popular Vote bill, if signed into law by Gov. Deval Patrick, will not go into effect until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation.

The movement is popularly characterized as "One Person, One Vote for President," a slogan designed to suggest the Electoral College method of counting presidential votes is "unfair" under a 14th Amendment "One Vote, One Person" definition of voter rights.

Critics fear the movement, if successful, could turn the entire nation into a potential "Florida 2000" battleground in close elections.

"Even in states where a candidate lost by a huge margin, every vote would need to be examined, a catastrophic, costly scenario," John Cork wrote in The New York Times.

"It would become possible, in a three-party race, for a candidate to fail to win even a single state but take the popular vote," he continued. "Do we really want to create a system where New York electoral votes could be determined by voters in Utah or Alaska?"

Corsi argues that a national movement to pass National Popular Vote legislation in the state legislatures has been motivated by Democrats who remain fixated on the idea that George W. Bush "stole" the 2000 presidential election, supposedly by relying on a Supreme Court decision to get Florida's electoral votes. They say the decision denied Al Gore the presidency, even though Gore got the majority of popular votes cast throughout the United States.

Once enough states possessing a majority of the electoral votes (270 of the 538 electors nationally) have enacted similar laws, the presidential candidate winning the most votes nationally would be assured a majority of the Electoral College votes, regardless of how other states vote or how their electors are distributed.

Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland and Washington have already adopted national-popular-vote bills.

These states add up to 61 electoral votes, 23 percent of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the legislation: Illinois, 20 electoral votes; New Jersey, 15 votes; Hawaii, 4 votes; Maryland, 10 votes; and Washington state, 11 votes.

The bill has passed 30 legislative chambers in 20 states, Corsi wrote. The National Popular Vote movement is already one-fourth of the way to accomplishing its goal.

"If the National Public Vote movement succeeds," he added, "the president might be chosen by the popular-vote winner in 10 or 11 of the most populous states."


Wild Thing's comment.......

The bill approved by the Senate 28-10 last week is part of a nationwide effort to secure the agreement of enough states so the winner of the national popular vote would be guaranteed to win the presidency.

The bill will not go into effect until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation. Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii and Washington state have approved the measure.

HORRIBLE! This maneuver will give the voting power to the socialist laden urban areas at the expense of the Conservative rural areas.

I bet this is all part of the mass amnesty plan. Once that happens, they’ll always win popular vote. And the republic is cooked.

This is unconstitutional!

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at July 26, 2010 07:48 AM


It also means that states with small populations will have little say so in elections. The candidates will only campaign in large urban areas of largly populated states. The Democrats are eroding The Constitution at every opportunity.

Posted by: TomR, armed in Texas at July 26, 2010 10:34 AM

They are eroding much more, TomR.

The wisdom of America’s founding fathers continues to astound all of us.

Limiting its powers repeatedly and extensively, they saw the forming of a federal government dangerous and but a mere assembly of the several and more powerful states knowing full well that the government that governs best governs closest and locally. Any reading of the Federalist Papers concludes this.

In Federalist 45, James Madison wrote: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite."

There was a time when modern urban living was not just urban, but urbane and civilized city living.

Without going into the details, just look at what our American cities have become today.

Our modern day rural life is the sanctuary of the civilized, or perhaps it always was.

This circumventing of the law and the Electoral College is the left’s continuing and successful attempt at reducing states rights and forming one huge ominous collectivist central planning capital in Washington.

It’s time we dusted off the 10th Amendment which clearly states:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”.

Any efforts to the contrary are subversive, destructive and detrimental to the states, our republic and the American people.

It may take the Supreme Court to bring a stop to this current effort, and more importantly this continuing usurping of central power.

Posted by: Carlos at July 26, 2010 12:56 PM

We were started down this slippery slope nearly a century ago. With each progressive administration that takes power, the faster we're sliding down the slope. Under Obama, the slope has become a luge run. We're speeding towards a brick wall at the bottom.

Posted by: Jim at July 26, 2010 03:16 PM

So, Democrats want popular vote to decide a presidential election? If that was the case 50 years ago, Nixon would have beaten Kennedy.

Posted by: BobF at July 26, 2010 08:03 PM

Article 2 and Amendment 12 of the constitution. This would have to be an Amendment to the constitution with a super majorty in the Senate and the states in order to get rid of it.

When they screwed us with the 17th Amendment, popular vote for the senate nobody was aware of it(1913) and it went through no problem, but that took one of our first safe guards away. And took the power away from the people, typical progressive playbook.

At this point it sounds good to the Unions but I think the repubs will buck the system and shoot it down. they have been trying to undermine the constitution for 100 years but now I think it would be a bad time to do it.

Especially now with the mood of most Americans.

Posted by: Mark at July 26, 2010 09:21 PM

Thank you so much everyone, your input means a lot to me.

Posted by: Wild Thing at July 27, 2010 12:06 AM

This "end-run" around the Constitutional Amendment process should not be allowed to stand. I wonder if the liberals in Massachusetts have really thought this through? All of their State's electoral votes would go to Sarah Palin in 2012 -- making her PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES -- simply because she manages to get a huge outpouring of votes in conservative States that would have otherwise been irrelevant, even though Barack Obama would have been re-elected using the "current" system. Of course, they think they can take advantage of large urban areas voting, but what if . . . ?

Posted by: JakeD at July 27, 2010 06:50 PM