New York Times Sunday Symposium on Electoral College, National Popular Vote Plan Bill

The June 24 New York Times has a Sunday Symposium with many letters to the editor all discussing the Electoral College and the National Popular Vote Plan. See here.


  1. David Foote · · Reply

    National Popular Vote is never, NEVER going to happen. First of all, without the approval of Congress regarding interstate compacts, it would clearly be held unconstitutional. Second, unless the feds somehow take control of every state’s presidential elections – – also an unconstitutional impossibility – – – the very thought of a nationwide popular vote recount in the event of a close election is horrific. NPV could lead to chaos. If the NPV proponents want to abolish the Electoral College, let them try, but the ONLY way it can be done is with a Constitutional amendment. If they succeed at that, I will stand back and salute; otherwise, forget it.

  2. Richard Winger · · Reply

    #1, every state elects its governor by popular vote, and that seems to work OK. If France and Mexico can use a direct popular vote to choose a president, why can’t we?

  3. Demo Rep · · Reply

    1787 top secret Federal Convention — make just enough fixes to hold the Free States and the EVIL slave States together.

    Worked until 1861-1865.

    NO uniform definition of Elector-Voter in the NPV scheme from Hell.
    Proper const. amdt –
    Uniform definition of Elector-Voter in ALL of the U.S.A.

    NONPARTISAN Approval Voting for the election of ALL Fed, State and local elected executive/judicial officers.

    NO legislative powers in any executive/judicial officers.
    TOTAL EVIL now regarding the about 6 marginal Electoral College States — nonstop EVIL pollsters with zillions of media 24/7 attack ads in such States.

  4. Paulie · · Reply

    Richard @2 They don’t have the US Constitution.

    What happens if recounts are still going on when the electoral college votes?

  5. Rob Richie · · Reply

    #3 David — on recounts ,the status quo is worse. There is a significantly greater chance of the need for a consequential recount in the current system, but not time to do a well-litigated recount under current law/norms. We can change those laws/norms, which is more important to deal with the status quo than with NPV.

    If NPV needs congressional consent, it needs congressional consent. A policy change with the backing of 70% of Americans can win that consent.

    The dominant system of winner-take-all rules for allocating electors is not “more constitutional.” In fact, James Madison and many other founders strongly opposed it. See:

  6. oldgulph · · Reply

    The U.S. Constitution, existing federal statutes, and independent state statutes guarantee “finality” in presidential elections long before the inauguration day in January.

    The U.S. Constitution requires the Electoral College to meet on the same day throughout the U.S. (mid-December). This sets a final deadline for vote counts from all states. In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court has interpreted the federal “safe harbor” statute to mean that the deadline for the state to finalize their vote count is 6 days before the meeting of the Electoral College.

    With both the current system and National Popular Vote, all counting, recounting, and judicial proceedings must be conducted so as to reach a “final determination” prior to the common nationwide date for the meeting of the Electoral College.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: