I'd be all for that

But electors have always been chosen by the "parties". Even back in 1800, the federalists in
the Massachusetts legislature weee going to make sure that only federalists that would vote for Adams to be electors

From States Rights to anti-States Rights in less than 160 years. Good job VA!

doubledog said:

---

From States Rights to anti-States Rights in less than 160 years. Good job VA!

---

Solid point! Also, I'd point out that black Virginians are mad about the redistricting scheme because they think it will decrease their US Rep delegation count. Packing and cracking. Time is a flat circle for democrats too.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

. States can not enter into political alliances/agreements with each other.

---

This is false.

that only applies if the compact is enhancing state power to the detriment of federal power.

Constitutionally, the "compact among states" clause does not required congressional approval of every agreement between states. States make compacts with each other all the time.

I don't think this case is clear for either side on that question.

but that doesn't matter because the proponents of this national popular vote plan to submit it to Congress for approval.

however, there is also an argument that Congress is prohibited from even reviewing this legislation approve it.

SCOTUS says congress approving a compact makes it federal law. Congress cannot make a a federal law on how electors are chosen, that is left exclusively to the states.

So this would be decided by SCOTUS on basis of whether it allowed under Article II.

gut feeling is that a state could agree to do this, but could not bind any other state to having to do it.

meaning that the "Compact" were struck down, each of these states could just do it on their own.
(though I would bet that many states own constitutions prevent it)

There is no requirement to even have a popular vote at all. South Carolina went 12 elections before having a popular vote

The "electoral college" is nothing now like it was when first enacted. Its a relic that needs to be changed. Not for a popular vote nationwide but for simply awarding the votes for each state based on popular vote winner on that state. Get the most votes in Texas in 2028, you get 40 electoral votes. No middle man; no faithless elector issue; no way to game the system. Simple way to keep the republic

---

Thank you for that. It's extremely frustrating that we see both parties, first the Democrats and now the Republicans in response, more focused on gaming the system to hold power in DC than on crafting policy to earn votes. The system is broken. I blame 1913. Wilson has to be considered the worst president in history. His tenure lead to the federal government becoming the most powerful entity in history and here we are.

BMX Bandit said:

---

I'd be all for that

But electors have always been chosen by the "parties". Even back in 1800, the federalists in
the Massachusetts legislature weee going to make sure that only federalists that would vote for Adams to be electors

---

Yes, thats why I referred to federalist 68

Quote:

---

men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.

---

ts5641 said:

---

USSC will surely strike this down?

---

Well, it's existed for 20 years and nothing has been said about it yet. There are 18 states and DC that are part of it now.

They have not said anything because there has not been any case that is ripe for consideration.

This Virginia law, like all the other states that are passing this don't go into effect until they have enough states on board such that their collective electoral college numbers exceed 270.


Until that happens, you aren't going to see any lawsuits. For now it's just a "what if"

BMX Bandit said:

---

They have not said anything because there has not been any case that is ripe for consideration.

This Virginia law, like all the other states that are passing this don't go into effect until they have enough states on board such that their collective electoral college numbers exceed 270.


Until that happens, you aren't going to see any lawsuits. For now it's just a "what if"

---

Yeah, I get that. But I guess we will wait into we are in the middle of a Constitutional crisis before addressing it. It's going to make Bush-Gore look minor in comparison when it happens.

And we both know it will only ever happen to try and push a Democrat into office that lost the electoral but won the popular. That's been the whole point of this was for Democrats to figure out yet another end around the law.