Comments for Third time the charm for study commission on La. Constitution? at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 7 out of 7 comments http://www.theind.com Sun, 26 May 2013 04:23:03 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18877 by oldgulph "Most Americans consider the idea of the candidate with the most popular votes being declared a loser detestable. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic." ------------------ The Presidency is unique, the position is administrative, not legislative. Imagine 33 states vote for candidate A and 17 for B but B wins the popular vote by a tiny margin. In a geographic and diverse country, Candidate A has shown broad support, as such, A is less likely to cause friction among the states. This is the genius of our electoral system. - James Melancon Mon, 20 Jun 2011 08:33:10 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18848 National Popular Vote is a state law, for state legislators to pass. The Electoral College that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founding Fathers but, instead, is the product of decades of evolutionary change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans consider the idea of the candidate with the most popular votes being declared a loser detestable. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic. - oldgulph Fri, 17 Jun 2011 13:04:31 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18829 written by oldgulph "Support for a national popular vote is strong in every smallest state surveyed in recent polls" ------------------------------ It may poll well but I doubt few understand the reason behind the current method. Nevertheless, I doubt any U.S. Senator from a small state would support a change. The question of popular vote comes up from time to time and them slips away. - James Melancon Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:08:24 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18812 Support for a national popular vote is strong in every smallest state surveyed in recent polls among Republican voters, Democratic voters, and independent voters, as well as every demographic group. Support in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): Alaska -- 70%, DC -- 76%, Delaware --75%, Idaho – 77%, Maine -- 77%, Montana – 72%, Nebraska -- 74%, New Hampshire --69%, Nevada -- 72%, New Mexico -- 76%, Oklahoma – 81%, Rhode Island -- 74%, South Dakota – 71%, Utah - 70%, Vermont -- 75%, and West Virginia – 81%, and Wyoming – 69%. - oldgulph Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:59:08 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18811 Most small states have been, ARE, and will be irrelevant under the current system. Now political clout comes from being a battleground state. Now with state-by-state winner-take-all laws presidential elections ignore 12 of the 13 lowest population states (3-4 electoral votes), that are almost invariably non-competitive, and ignored, in presidential elections. Six regularly vote Republican (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota), and six regularly vote Democratic (Rhode Island, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont, Maine, and DC) in presidential elections. Nine state legislative chambers in the lowest population states have passed the National Popular Vote bill. It has been enacted by the District of Columbia, Hawaii, and Vermont. None of the 10 most rural states (VT, ME, WV, MS, SD, AR, MT, ND, AL, and KY) is a battleground state. The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes does not enhance the influence of rural states, because the most rural states are not battleground states. The 11 most populous states contain 56% of the population of the United States, but under the current system, a candidate could win the Presidency by winning a mere 51% of the vote in just these 11 biggest states -- that is, a mere 26% of the nation's votes. - oldgulph Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:52:20 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18808 The National Popular Vote bill is a mistake. The current system weights the smaller states just a little heavier then the larger. This helps the smaller state maintain a certain level of influence. Without it, most small states run the risk of being irrelevant. Why someone from Louisiana would propose this shows a lack of thought. - James Melancon Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:33:31 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8508-third-time-the-charm-for-study-commission-on-la-constitution#comment-18805 The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The National Popular Vote bill is a state-based approach. It preserves the Electoral College and state control of elections. It changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College. It assures that every vote is equal and that every voter will matter in every state in every presidential election, as in virtually every other election in the country. Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states, that don't include Louisiana. Under the National Popular Vote bill, all the electoral votes from all the states that have enacted the bill would be awarded, as a bloc, to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes — that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). The bill would thus guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes. A "republican" form of government means that the voters do not make laws themselves but, instead, delegate the job to periodically elected officials (Congressmen, Senators, and the President). The United States has a republican form of government regardless of whether popular votes for presidential electors are tallied at the state-level (as has been the case in 48 states) or at district-level (as has been the case in Maine and Nebraska) or at 50-state-level (as under the National Popular Vote bill). The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, along district lines (as has been the case in Maine and Nebraska), or national lines. With National Popular Vote, big cities would not get all of candidates’ attention, much less control the outcome. The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 19% of the population of the United States. A "big city" only campaign would not win. - oldgulph Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:37:43 +0100