Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College by Tara Ross

Author:Tara Ross [Ross, Tara]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Published: 2012-10-31T22:00:00+00:00

Part Four

The National Popular

Vote Plan

Chapter Twelve

NPV’s Attack

on the Electoral College

Shortly after the 2000 election, several academics proposed an idea that would purportedly allow a direct popular election, without the bother of a constitutional amendment.[422] Such creativity is necessary, one professor argued, because public discussion regarding a direct popular vote is likely to be “stifled” by the difficulty of effecting an amendment.[423] A formal amendment requires the support of two-thirds of the House and the Senate; it must then be ratified by 38 states.[424] Quite an uphill battle. The professors’ alternative plan would allow a handful of states to do an end-run around the amendment process, implementing a “De Facto Direct Election” (as it was then called) until support for an amendment can be found.[425]

In 2006, a California-based group decided to take the idea and run with it: National Popular Vote, Inc. (NPV) was born.[426] It is the most direct threat to the Electoral College that the country has ever seen, and it stands a great chance of success unless voters nationwide learn about the effort and fight back against it.

Mechanics of the Legislation

NPV’s proposal relies heavily on the states’ role in our current presidential election system.[427] Article II of the Constitution provides: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . . .”[428] As this book has discussed, most states have chosen to allocate their electors to the winner of the statewide popular vote. NPV seeks to change this. It instead asks states to allocate their electors to the winner of the national popular vote. If states with a majority of electors (currently 270) were to agree, then the presidential election system would operate as a national popular referendum rather than a federalist, state-by-state process. To ensure that no state is left alone in its decision, NPV operates through an interstate compact. States do not have to allocate their electors to the winner of the national popular vote until a critical mass of states has agreed to join the effort—then they will all do it together.

Put differently, the majority of electors can dictate the outcome of any presidential election. Thus, if those electors are committed to the winner of the national popular vote, then the nation is, in effect, relying upon a national direct election system. The Electoral College would still exist, but only on paper. It would have no practical effect on presidential campaigns. As one legal scholar explains, the compact reduces “the Electoral College to an empty shell.”[429]

Technically, NPV’s proposal could be enacted by only 11 states—the 11 largest states. Following the 2010 Census, these states hold exactly 270 electors, just enough to win a presidential election. Therefore, if these states were to choose to award their electors in accordance with the national popular vote total, they could determine the outcome of the election.[430] Their decision would hold even if the other 39 states voted for the other presidential candidate. By contrast, remember, a constitutional amendment requires the approval of three-quarters of the states (currently 38).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.