Is still better than the Evil Party
A coalition of former congressmen is launching a campaign to change how Americans select their president by reforming the Electoral College system, saying campaigns for the White House should be reliant on the nationwide popular vote rather than simply the outcome in a handful of swing states.
The bipartisan group plans to announce its proposal Thursday and begin a state-by-state effort to amend the Electoral College so the winner reflects the view of the country instead of an individual state or two with a close vote on Election Day. The plan would seek to eliminate the possibility of a candidate winning the popular vote but losing the election, as happened to former Vice President Al Gore in 2000.
“The time is long past to not play Electoral College roulette every four years,” former Sen. Birch Bayh, D-Ind., said in an interview. “It is a throwback to 1887.”
The plan, called the Campaign for the National Popular Vote, will be unveiled in Washington by Bayh; former Rep. John Anderson, R-Ill.; and other former members of Congress. The effort begins in Illinois, where legislation has been introduced in the General Assembly, followed by California and other states.
Even supporters, however, concede it’s an uphill battle. Democrats may stand to gain more from enacting such reforms, considering candidates could increase their margins in heavily populated urban areas that typically favor their party.
Chicago, then Los Angeles, then Frisco, then New York.
Won’t that be nice, having the uber-urban populations choosing out Chief Executive while all the fly over territory funds their idiocy.
The 17th Amendment was bad enough. This would be sheer lunacy, hence why the left supports it.
Also, if one member of the other party joins your group and that qualifies it to be ‘bi-partisan’ can we finally get No Child Left Behind classified as such by the MSM?
Constitutionally speaking, what exactly are they trying to accomplish with legislation at the state level? State legislation cannot amend the Constitution.
The Constitution can be amended by legislation originating in Congress (2/3 majority of both houses, which these twinks have no chance of achieving), which must then be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures (which means 37, if my math is right.) Something they also have little chance of achieving.
The only thing I can think of is that they’re trying to call a convention, which is another way to go about amending the Constitution. Don’t remember how many states have to ask for one. But this route is EXTREMELY dangerous. Why? Because once convened, there’s no limit to what the convention can play with. Anything in the Constitution is fair game. That’s the biggest reason in hasn’t happened since 1787.