• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Unconstitutional?

Is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Unconstitutional

  • Total voters
    36
Bullseye said:
Yep and when that was written Senators were appointed by state legislators and slaves only counted as 3/5s of a person for allocating House seats. And women couldn't vote.
Click to expand...

To be fair, we had constitutional amendments change all of those things. So now the Constitution explicitly says that Senators should be elected by popular vote in a state and that women can vote.

There's been no similar amendment changing the clause giving state's power to choose electors.
 
Anagram said:
To be fair, we had constitutional amendments change all of those things. So now the Constitution explicitly says that Senators should be elected by popular vote in a state and that women can vote.

There's been no similar amendment changing the clause giving state's power to choose electors.
Click to expand...
Technically true, but I doubt any scheme that ignores the wishes of the state's voters will ever pass constitutional muster. I see nothing more in this entire movement than a bunch of spoiled LW brats still pouting because their dear Hillary ran a terrible campaign and was denied the honor that they think was rightfully hers. They need to work on figuring out how to win the next election instead of refighting the last one.
 
Bullseye said:
Technically true, but I doubt any scheme that ignores the wishes of the state's voters will ever pass constitutional muster. I see nothing more in this entire movement than a bunch of spoiled LW brats still pouting because their dear Hillary ran a terrible campaign and was denied the honor that they think was rightfully hers. They need to work on figuring out how to win the next election instead of refighting the last one.
Click to expand...

In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until the 2016 election, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

Trump, April 26, 2018 on “Fox & Friends”
“I would rather have a popular election, but it’s a totally different campaign.”
“I would rather have the popular vote because it’s, to me, it’s much easier to win the popular vote.”

Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
“I would rather have a popular vote. “

Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
“ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
"The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."

In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

Recent and past presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Michael Dukakis (D-MA), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

Recent and past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN), Senator and Vice President Al Gore (D-TN), Ralph Nader, Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD), Jill Stein (Green), Senator Birch Bayh (D-IN), Senator and Governor Lincoln Chafee (R-I-D, -RI), Governor and former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean (D–VT), Congressmen John Anderson (R, I –ILL).

Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

In 2016 the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill 40-16-4.
Two-thirds of the Republicans and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives sponsored the bill.
In January 2016, two-thirds of the Arizona Senate sponsored the bill.

In 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill by a 28–18 margin.

In 2009, the Arkansas House of Representatives passed the bill

Since 2006, the bill has passed 36 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 261 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Nevada (6), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Colorado (9), and New Mexico (5).
 
There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents states from making the decision now that winning the national popular vote is required to win the presidency.
 
mvymvy said:
In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until the 2016 election, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

Trump, April 26, 2018 on “Fox & Friends”
“I would rather have a popular election, but it’s a totally different campaign.”
“I would rather have the popular vote because it’s, to me, it’s much easier to win the popular vote.”

Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
“I would rather have a popular vote. “

Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
“ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
"The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."

In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

Recent and past presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Michael Dukakis (D-MA), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

Recent and past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN), Senator and Vice President Al Gore (D-TN), Ralph Nader, Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD), Jill Stein (Green), Senator Birch Bayh (D-IN), Senator and Governor Lincoln Chafee (R-I-D, -RI), Governor and former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean (D–VT), Congressmen John Anderson (R, I –ILL).

Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

In 2016 the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill 40-16-4.
Two-thirds of the Republicans and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives sponsored the bill.
In January 2016, two-thirds of the Arizona Senate sponsored the bill.

In 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill by a 28–18 margin.

In 2009, the Arkansas House of Representatives passed the bill

Since 2006, the bill has passed 36 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 261 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Nevada (6), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Colorado (9), and New Mexico (5).
Click to expand...
Your just repeating the same prattle over and over. BTW, I don't give a crap what Trump said or how many times he said it. I'm just telling you that first time a state awards its electoral votes to other than the winner of ITS popular vote you're gonna see a court challenge that will make Gore V Bush look like a minor squabble.
 
Bullseye said:
Your just repeating the same prattle over and over. BTW, I don't give a crap what Trump said or how many times he said it. I'm just telling you that first time a state awards its electoral votes to other than the winner of ITS popular vote you're gonna see a court challenge that will make Gore V Bush look like a minor squabble.
Click to expand...

"The National Popular Vote states . . . have made a policy choice about the substantive intelligible criteria (i.e., national popularity) that they want to use to make their selection of electors. There is nothing in Article II (or elsewhere in the Constitution) that prevents them from making the decision that, in the Twenty-First Century, national voter popularity is a (or perhaps the) crucial factor in worthiness for the office of the President.”
- Vikram David Amar - professor and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the UC Davis School of Law. Before becoming a professor, he clerked for Judge William A. Norris of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and for Justice Harry Blackmun at the Supreme Court of the United States.

In state polls of voters each with a second question that specifically emphasized that their state's electoral votes would be awarded to the winner of the national popular vote in all 50 states, not necessarily their state's winner, there was only a 4-8% decrease of support.

Question 1: "How do you think we should elect the President: Should it be the candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states, or the current Electoral College system?"

Question 2: "Do you think it more important that a state's electoral votes be cast for the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in that state, or is it more important to guarantee that the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states becomes president?"

Support for a National Popular Vote
South Dakota -- 75% for Question 1, 67% for Question 2.
Connecticut -- 74% for Question 1, 68% for Question 2,
Utah -- 70% for Question 1, 66% for Question 2
 
washunut said:
The number of electoral votes by state changes after census. So what would happen if they get to 270, then down the road their share goes below the threshold.
Click to expand...

I believe that the NPVIC would then go back to not being in effect for the next election until 270 EVs worth of states have signed on again.
 
Bullseye said:
Technically true, but I doubt any scheme that ignores the wishes of the state's voters will ever pass constitutional muster. I see nothing more in this entire movement than a bunch of spoiled LW brats still pouting because their dear Hillary ran a terrible campaign and was denied the honor that they think was rightfully hers. They need to work on figuring out how to win the next election instead of refighting the last one.
Click to expand...

Not going to argue whether it's a good or bad idea, but I disagree with your constitutional claims. For one, the states are explicitly empowered under the constitution to choose how to select electors. There's no requirement to even let their state's voters vote at all. In the early days of our country many states instead let the state legislature select the electors.

With not constitutional requirement to select electors through a state's vote, I don't see any constitutional issues.
 
Anagram said:
Not going to argue whether it's a good or bad idea, but I disagree with your constitutional claims. For one, the states are explicitly empowered under the constitution to choose how to select electors. There's no requirement to even let their state's voters vote at all. In the early days of our country many states instead let the state legislature select the electors.

With not constitutional requirement to select electors through a state's vote, I don't see any constitutional issues.
Click to expand...
Can you seriously doubt the that the founding fathers had anything in mind OTHER than the decision of the state's voters being the guidance?
 
Bullseye said:
Can you seriously doubt the that the founding fathers had anything in mind OTHER than the decision of the state's voters being the guidance?
Click to expand...

Well yeah. Many of the states originally had the legislatures pick the electors and didn't let the state's voters vote.

But even if that weren't so, when they explicitly give the states the power to decide something, then they get to decide. It wouldn't make sense to have the founders say that the states have the power to decide, but then construe that power to mean that they really have to only select electors in this one way.
 
Bullseye said:
Can you seriously doubt the that the founding fathers had anything in mind OTHER than the decision of the state's voters being the guidance?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The case can be made that they did everything in their power to keep a national presidential popular vote from happening.
 
Last edited:
Anagram said:
Well yeah. Many of the states originally had the legislatures pick the electors and didn't let the state's voters vote.

But even if that weren't so, when they explicitly give the states the power to decide something, then they get to decide. It wouldn't make sense to have the founders say that the states have the power to decide, but then construe that power to mean that they really have to only select electors in this one way.
Click to expand...
But even IF the states were given unlimited choice on how to choose it's electors I doubt that going along with the majority of other states popular vote would have entered their minds. It's an intra-state decision.
 
Howard the Duck said:
Absolutely. The case can be made that they did everything in their power to keep a national presidential popular vote from happening.
Click to expand...

Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1
“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.

In the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 and second election in 1792, the states employed a wide variety of methods for choosing presidential electors, including
● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council,
● appointment by both houses of the state legislature,
● popular election using special single-member presidential-elector districts,
● popular election using counties as presidential-elector districts,
● popular election using congressional districts,
● popular election using multi-member regional districts,
● combinations of popular election and legislative choice,
● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council combined with the state legislature, and
● statewide popular election.

The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding a state's electoral votes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom