National Popular Vote you think?

Progressive "Federalism" Makes a Mockery of the Founders’ Vision Apr 16th, 2018 6 min read COMMENTARY BY John W. York, Ph.D. Policy Analyst John is a policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation. Key Takeaways Republican states locked horns with President Obama often — Democrats’ efforts are unprecedented in scale and detrimental to constitutional government. Democratic attorneys general have sued the president over a temporary travel ban halting citizens of eight countries identified as potent sources of terrorism. Republican state attorneys general are pressuring the administration to enforce the law in a policy area for which the federal government is solely responsible. Copied Since President Donald Trump took off...

"Fixing" Our Democracy Would Only Make Matters Worse. Aug 1st, 2019 5 min read COMMENTARY BY John W. York, Ph.D. Policy Analyst John is a policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation. Each of those proposals would harm the integrity of the constitutional republic that our Founders so painstakingly crafted. Doug Armand/Getty Images Copied During Tuesday night’s Democratic presidential debate, Pete Buttigieg proposed a raft of supposed “reforms” that have,  until recently , been the provenance of fringe  groups  and  politicians  such as D.C.’s nonvoting Democratic congresswoman,...

Liberals' National Popular Vote Scheme Is Unconstitutional and Dangerous Liberals' National Popular Vote Scheme Is Unconstitutional and Dangerous By Brian S. Messenger As of now, fourteen states have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which attempts to eliminate the Electoral College as set forth in the United States Constitution.  There have been many good articles written about the legality of interstate compacts to achieve the desired National Popular Vote goals.  The author does not need to rehash all of those problems but believes that there are three additional ways that the NPVIC is both unconstitutional and dangerous. Constitutional Flaw #1: Non-Republican Form of Government Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution says in part that   "[t]he United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a  Republican Form of Government."  The United States is a constitu...

Electoral College Rules Made Simple (or, rather, less complicated)—2nd in a Series November 30, 2017 Rob Natelson The first article in this series surveyed the problems the framers encountered in crafting a mode for choosing the president and how they addressed those problems. This installment explains in detail the Constitution’s compressed and technical language as it was understood after adoption of the Twelfth Amendment in 1804. Variations between the original understanding and modern practice are noted in this article. The Constitution initially provided that after the choice of the president the person with the most electoral votes would become vice president. This might be the second-highest electoral vote-getter, but not necessarily: If the election was thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate had won a majority of the electoral votes, the House could elect any of the five top vote getters. If the House did not elect the top vote ge...

Why Did the Framers Create the Electoral College?—1st in a Series November 26, 2017 Rob Natelson   Colorado went Democrat in the last presidential election. But three of those elected as presidential electors wanted to vote for someone other than Hillary Clinton. Two eventually cast ballots for Clinton under court order, while one—not a party to the court proceedings—opted for Ohio Governor John Kasich, a Republican. After this “Hamilton elector” voted, state officials voided his ballot and removed him from office . The other electors chose someone more compliant to replace him. Litigation  over the issue still continues, and is likely to reach the U.S. Supreme Court. Moreover, President Trump’s victory in the Electoral College, despite losing the popular vote, remains controversial. So it seems like a good time to explore what the Electoral College is, the reasons for it, and the Constitution’s rules governing it. This is the first of a series of posts o...

Why the “National Popular Vote” scheme is unconstitutional February 4, 2019 Rob Natelson This article first appeared in the Daily Caller. The U.S. Supreme Court says each state legislature has “plenary” (complete) power to decide how its state’s presidential electors are chosen. But suppose a state legislature decided to raise cash by selling its electors to the highest bidder. Do you think the Supreme Court would uphold such a measure? If your answer is “no,” then you intuitively grasp a basic principle of constitutional law—one overlooked by those proposing the “ National Popular Vote Compact ” (NPV). NPV is a plan to change how we elect our president. Under the plan, each state signs a compact to award all its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote. The compact comes into effect when states with a majority of presidential electors sign on. In assessing the constitutionality of NPV, you have to consider some o...