Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15986
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 25 Nov 2020, 7:03 am

bbauska wrote:Perhaps a constitutional Amendment would solve the issue. After all, that is a way to change the Constitution. Making the election be a strict "Popular vote" election would be, well, unconstitutional.

It depends on how it is done.

The constitution says that each State decides. If States decide to delegate Electors based on the national vote rather than the statewide (or Statewide and electoral district), that is within their power to do. As I understand it several states have that proposal on the books, to be activated when >269 electors would be covered by it. It would be a tough ask to challenge that constitutionally.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15986
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 25 Nov 2020, 7:58 am

Well, it is positive that the GSA have now allowed transition to start. And it seems that the Trump campaign is running out of legal road to challenge results - key states are certifying their results and it would be a tall order for a court to overturn any of them (in 2000 that wasn't even the Gore campaign goal in legal cases, it was all about the count in Florida and which votes would or would not be counted, and when that was settled, that was that).

But I don't put it past Trump to try anything he can. Or his supporters from carrying the torch into January and beyond.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7189
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 25 Nov 2020, 9:07 am

danivon wrote:
bbauska wrote:Perhaps a constitutional Amendment would solve the issue. After all, that is a way to change the Constitution. Making the election be a strict "Popular vote" election would be, well, unconstitutional.

It depends on how it is done.

The constitution says that each State decides. If States decide to delegate Electors based on the national vote rather than the statewide (or Statewide and electoral district), that is within their power to do. As I understand it several states have that proposal on the books, to be activated when >269 electors would be covered by it. It would be a tough ask to challenge that constitutionally.


This is what I am saying. The Constitution says what the election should be run as regarding the Electoral College. There are those who wish to have the Electoral disbanded. Those people should start a Constitutional Amendment process.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 25 Nov 2020, 11:34 am

The Electoral College is one of the last vestiges of a system that was originally somewhat elitist and anti-democratic. There used to be property requirements to vote, of course there was slavery, women could not vote and senators used to be selected by state legislatures, and of course the Senate was supposed to be a check on the House. Now, even the filibuster in the Senate is almost gone and most of the rest of the anti-democratic (anti-mob rule the founders would have thought) features have been done away with. One (wo) man, one vote; that is the democratic ideal.

And Brad you need not say start a constitutional amendment. Please. You know and we know that's impossible when one side (your side!) has a vested interest in the status quo.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7189
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 25 Nov 2020, 12:46 pm

And your side needs to quit bringing it up as well! :angel:
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 25 Nov 2020, 1:03 pm

We can bitch about it, cant we! Thats the American Way...
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7189
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 25 Nov 2020, 1:45 pm

freeman3 wrote:We can bitch about it, cant we! Thats the American Way...


Sadly, yes. More bitching, and less doing lately.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15986
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 26 Nov 2020, 9:02 am

bbauska wrote:
danivon wrote:
bbauska wrote:Perhaps a constitutional Amendment would solve the issue. After all, that is a way to change the Constitution. Making the election be a strict "Popular vote" election would be, well, unconstitutional.

It depends on how it is done.

The constitution says that each State decides. If States decide to delegate Electors based on the national vote rather than the statewide (or Statewide and electoral district), that is within their power to do. As I understand it several states have that proposal on the books, to be activated when >269 electors would be covered by it. It would be a tough ask to challenge that constitutionally.


This is what I am saying. The Constitution says what the election should be run as regarding the Electoral College. There are those who wish to have the Electoral disbanded. Those people should start a Constitutional Amendment process.

The idea where states would allocate their EC delegates to the winner of the national popular vote is Constitutional, because it retains the Electoral College and it is for States to decide how to fill their places.

It may have the effect of making the EC a rubber stamp, but then again it pretty much usually is unless no candidate gets >50% of delegates, which rarely happens, especially in a 2-party system.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4946
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 26 Nov 2020, 10:19 am

The Electoral College has really helped us these last few weeks. It has forced the Trump people to focus on specific states and their specific rules. Those states maintain their checks and balance vis-a-vis the Federal government. The states also have their own checks and balance with 3 branches who have responsibilities and limits. By giving this power to the states, the Federal Executive branch has been unable to impose its will.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11281
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 26 Nov 2020, 11:50 am

Rayjay
By giving this power to the states, the Federal Executive branch has been unable to impose its will.


Power to the States had meant gerrymandered house districts, and voter suppression tactics in some cases.
And the reason the Executive wasn't successful in imposing its will, has more to do with the individual state officials that had the legal authority to effect results, then the system.

A fully independent federal electoral commission would go a long ways to eliminating potential partisan interference and could eliminate gerrymandering to make the House a more democratic institution.
I don't know whether or not that requires a Constitutional Amendment... but I'm certain the US Constitution could do with a rewrite .
Most other democracies have more modern constitutions, written with the knowledge of the failings of what came before. They don't all work perfectly either and many could be improved upon... But one thing most do have, is that they aren't considered sacred documents that shouldn't be changed.