An emerging threat? - The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community
 8Likes
  • 5 Post By lynxone
  • 3 Post By simoncool
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 5 (permalink) Old 01-08-2020, 01:45 AM Thread Starter
Diehard Outdoorsman
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pa
Posts: 3,492
Back To Top
An emerging threat?

While this is not exactly " new " It should worry supporters of the Constitution and Patriots in the United States. Every time I hear another state joining or giving NPV consideration I worry more. There is simply no civics being taught in our education systems any longer. Up to each of us to teach or inform someone the consequences of ignoring parts of the Constitution. With all the trash news and daily rubbish spewed by an uneducated national press we are more likely than ever to forget how and why this great nation was founded. The current group of Democrats running in the next election exhibit such ignorance I honestly think transgressions against our civilized society and constitution may become the norm in just a few decades. Hope I am wrong..............

This is from Trent England, the Director of Save Our States Project.

Anti-Electoral College amendments with bipartisan support in the 1950s and 1970s failed to receive the two-thirds votes in Congress they needed in order to be sent to the states for consideration. Likewise today, partisan amendments will not make it through Congress. Nor, if they did, could they win ratification among the states.

But there is a serious threat to the Electoral College. Until recently, it has gone mostly unnoticed, as it has made its way through various state legislatures. If it works according to its supporters’ intent, it would nullify the Electoral College by creating a de facto direct election for president.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or NPV, takes advantage of the flexibility granted to state legislatures in the Constitution: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” The original intent of this was to allow state legislators to determine how best to represent their state in presidential elections. The electors represent the state—not just the legislature—even though the latter has power to direct the manner of appointment. By contrast, NPV supporters argue that this power allows state legislatures to ignore their state’s voters and appoint electors based on the national popular vote. This is what the compact would require states to do.

Of course, no state would do this unilaterally, so NPV has a “trigger”: it only takes effect if adopted by enough states to control 270 electoral votes—in other words, a majority that would control the outcome of presidential elections. So far, 14 states and the District of Columbia have signed on, with a total of 189 electoral votes.

Until this year, every state that had joined NPV was heavily Democratic: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The NPV campaign has struggled to win other Democratic states: Delaware only adopted it this year and it still has not passed in Oregon (though it may soon). Following the 2018 election, Democrats came into control of both the legislatures and the governorships in the purple states of Colorado and New Mexico, which have subsequently joined NPV.

NPV would have the same effect as abolishing the Electoral College. Fraud in one state would affect every state, and the only way to deal with it would be to give more power to the federal government. Elections that are especially close would require nationwide recounts. Candidates could win based on intense support from a narrow region or from big cities. NPV also carries its own unique risks: despite its name, the plan cannot actually create a national popular vote. Each state would still—at least for the time being—run its own elections. This means a patchwork of rules for everything from which candidates are on the ballot to how disputes are settled. NPV would also reward states with lax election laws—the higher the turnout, legal or not, the more power for that state. Finally, each NPV state would certify its own “national” vote total. But what would happen when there are charges of skullduggery? Would states really trust, with no power to verify, other state’s returns?

Uncertainty and litigation would likely follow. In fact, NPV is probably unconstitutional. For one thing, it ignores the Article I, Section 10 requirement that interstate compacts receive congressional consent. There is also the fact that the structure of the Electoral College clause of the Constitution implies there is some limit on the power of state legislatures to ignore the will of their state’s people.

One danger of all these attacks on the Electoral College is, of course, that we lose the state-by-state system designed by the Framers and its protections against regionalism and fraud. This would alter our politics in some obvious ways—shifting power toward urban centers, for example—but also in ways we cannot know in advance. Would an increase in presidents who win by small pluralities lead to a rise of splinter parties and spoiler candidates? Would fears of election fraud in places like Chicago and Broward County lead to demands for greater federal control over elections?

The more fundamental danger is that these attacks undermine the Constitution as a whole. Arguments that the Constitution is outmoded and that democracy is an end in itself are arguments that can just as easily be turned against any of the constitutional checks and balances that have preserved free government in America for well over two centuries. The measure of our fundamental law is not whether it actualizes the general will—that was the point of the French Revolution, not the American. The measure of our Constitution is whether it is effective at encouraging just, stable, and free government—government that protects the rights of its citizens.

The Electoral College is effective at doing this. We need to preserve it, and we need to help our fellow Americans understand why it matters.

Intelligence without wisdom is Modern Society............
lynxone is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 5 (permalink) Old 01-08-2020, 04:47 AM
The Man
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 5,249
Back To Top
As the population shifts towards urban Democratic areas having larger populations, illegal aliens bolstering those numbers, the system is already threatened. Every census those areas gain electors.
Dogface, treefisher and pappybear like this.
simoncool is offline  
post #3 of 5 (permalink) Old 01-09-2020, 01:57 AM Thread Starter
Diehard Outdoorsman
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pa
Posts: 3,492
Back To Top
Quote:
Originally Posted by simoncool View Post
As the population shifts towards urban Democratic areas having larger populations, illegal aliens bolstering those numbers, the system is already threatened. Every census those areas gain electors.
Good point. Most immigrants (legal or not) are ignorant of our history so most will align with the left. The progressives are slowly turning the western states too. I reckon it's only a matter of time till historical ignorance take out this grand republic.

Intelligence without wisdom is Modern Society............
lynxone is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 5 (permalink) Old 01-09-2020, 04:13 AM
Frequent Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: bedford,pa
Posts: 964
Back To Top
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynxone View Post
Good point. Most immigrants (legal or not) are ignorant of our history so most will align with the left. The progressives are slowly turning the western states too. I reckon it's only a matter of time till historical ignorance take out this grand republic.
I read recently that after the new census democrats will get 22 to 24 more seats in the house due to the affect of illegal immigration. If Trump wins the election with control of the house and senate, he needs to address the assault on the constitution including free speech and second amendment rights. Maybe we need a constitutional convention if he has enough support to make things right.
rockyDD is online now  
post #5 of 5 (permalink) Old 01-09-2020, 06:59 AM
Senior Member
 
Buckethead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ima Clarkonian!
Posts: 19,940
Back To Top
In all actuality, these NPV laws favor Republicans. All the states who have them are solid blue states that go to the Dem candidate 99% of the time anyway. I imagine they would find a way to try to get around the law in the event a Republican won the popular vote as well.

I don't have ducks. I don't have rows. I have squirrels. And they're drunk.
Buckethead is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome