Supreme Court ruling coming up could cause election chaos

 

The United States Supreme Court will hear arguments soon in Colorado’s “faithless electors” case, after the state in October appealed a federal court ruling that said that presidential electors could back whichever candidate they choose no matter the popular vote of a state.

Is an Electoral College elector required to vote who their State voter’s elect? An interesting Supreme Court case coming up that will test the meddle of our Supremes. The main issue here is that some states are trying to force electors to vote based on totals outside their states. That is what the states must be blocked from doing.

In 2016 we had wayward electors and a Colorado appeals court ruled in their favor. Twenty-two States support the Colorado ruling. Thus the Supremes now will decide the fate of our Republic.

 

What states can do, is decide if they are winner-take-all states, split vote states, or perhaps even vote by district states. Take Maine in 2016 and why Trump decided at the last moment he would try and snag a delegate or two.

Maine is one of only two states (Nebraska is the other) that doesn’t divvy out its electoral college votes on a winner-take-all basis.

Maine and Nebraska have adapted a different approach. Using the ‘congressional district method’, these states allocate two electoral votes to the state popular vote winner, and then one electoral vote to the popular vote winner in each Congressional district (2 in Maine, 3 in Nebraska). This creates multiple popular vote contests in these states, which could lead to a split electoral vote.

Most states are winner-take-all, and in that case an elector can be fined for not voting they way the most voters in the state want. If a state wants to be able to split their votes, they can do that too, and the electors are free to vote based on the result in their district. But in all these cases the electors are voting based on the will of those within their state. That is the purpose of elections, to represent the will of the people in each state.

There will be “chaos” in the 2020 presidential election if the Supreme Court decides that states cannot require Electoral College electors to vote for the candidate their voters select, warns an analysis by two legal scholars.

“The timing could not be worse,” wrote Paul M. Smith and Adav Noti, both of the non-profit Campaign Legal Center, which filed a brief in support of states in two cases.

In the two cases – Chiafalo v. Washington and Colorado Department of State v. Baca – a designated Electoral College elector chose not to vote for the candidate that earned the most popular votes in the state. The electors were replaced and were sued.

According to the Constitution, voters in presidential elections actually choose a preferred slate of electors rather than a candidate.

And they would be targeted by people with nefarious goals, warned Smith and Noti.

“Here’s the scary part: Of the four most important federal anti-corruption laws, not one covers presidential electors,” they wrote. “Electors can accept unlimited amounts of money in connection with their official duties. And they don’t even need to tell anyone.”

Historically, the writers acknowledge, “most electors have been faithful to their states’ voters, even when not legally required to do so.”

Colorado appealed a lower-court ruling that favored elector Michael Baca. The court concluded the state’s presidential electors are not required to follow state rules and vote for the presidential candidate who received the most votes in the state.

“One of the purposes of the Electoral College is to prevent a demagogue from taking office,” Baca said, referring to one of Alexander Hamilton’s contributions to the Federalist Papers. “And that’s what I tried to do.”

Twenty-two other states have expressed support for Colorado’s ruling.

The Associated Press reported there were 10 faithless electors in 2016, with four in Washington state, a Democratic elector in Hawaii and two Republican electors in Texas. Democratic electors who said they would not vote for Clinton were replaced in Maine and Minnesota.

H/T: WND

The Framers left the door open for various election frauds by allowing States to determine various iterations of how an election for national offices can be carried out. This one could be a doozy.

Other than this, all is doing well in the swamp.

 

Eleven States have formed compact to pool electoral votes to country’s popular votes

 

You hear the drumbeat….Hillary Clinton blamed the electoral college among many things for her loss. Now she and others such as Cortex are out on the same old trail. Do away with the electoral college.

What I am here to tell you is that we are well underway of doing away with the electoral college with not so much as amending the Constitution. How? Let me give you a way back post.

Forget the 12th Amendment which demands the Electoral College. Instead form an interstate compact:

Additionally, the framers of the Constitution were attempting to prevent too much power from being directly put into the hands of the public. They were consistently wary of any one party having too much power, and there was no difference between a tyranny of one individual and a tyranny of the majority, in their opinion. The Electoral College system was designed so as to nullify some of the potential for the tyranny of the majority by making population less important in the whole of the Electoral College process. Keep Reading

Now the new wrinkle. Give the State’s electoral votes to the Presidential candidate who wins the country’s popular vote thus insuring the demise of the electoral college and overriding the Constitution.

The Connecticut state Senate on Saturday voted in favor of a measure to give the state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote.

The move puts the state in a position to become the 11th, in addition to Washington, D.C., to join an interstate compact to pool their electoral college votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote.

The state Senate voted 21-14 in favor of the bill, with the support of three GOP lawmakers, The Guardian reported. The measure passed the state House on a 77-73 vote last month. Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy is expected to sign the legislation, according to the report.

With the addition of Connecticut’s seven electoral votes, the compact would have 172 in total. For the compact to go into effect nationally, it would need 270 electoral votes – the number needed for a candidate to win the presidency. More at The Hill

A new map courtesy of the Cook Political Report 

Easy to see how a few States with major Democrat numbers could rule Fly-Over country.

 

 

 

No need to change the constitution. Sounds to me that it’s time to take this action to court and have it adjudicated.

Democrat candidate Cortez calls the system a ‘shadow of slavery’s power’ after the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Dinesh D’Souza reacts on ‘Fox & Friends.’

 

 

Hint: We are a constitutional republic, not a democratic republic.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic socialist hoping to represent New York’s 14th Congressional District, declared over the weekend that the Electoral College is a racist American relic that must be abolished.

“It is well past time we eliminate the Electoral College, a shadow of slavery’s power on America today that undermines our nation as a democratic republic,” the 28-year-old Boston University graduate tweeted to her 881,000 followers Saturday afternoon.

H/T: Washington Times

Bonus:

Here is a fun interactive map link that shows how America has voted in every election since 1824. Slide the arrow between years for all results: Presidential election results

From an earlier B-ville post:

 

Connecticut becomes 11th State to give electoral votes to Presidential candidate with most popular votes

 

While we were looking the other way, the Progs have been busy little bees in changing who qualifies to vote and how our election outcomes are determined.

First the felons will soon have the right to vote if they have not already gotten it.

Then the push is on to make 16 year olds have the right to vote. Europe is well on the way to making it a reality. Good ole E.U.

Forget the 12th Amendment which demands the Electoral College. Instead form an interstate compact:

Additionally, the framers of the Constitution were attempting to prevent too much power from being directly put into the hands of the public. They were consistently wary of any one party having too much power, and there was no difference between a tyranny of one individual and a tyranny of the majority, in their opinion. The Electoral College system was designed so as to nullify some of the potential for the tyranny of the majority by making population less important in the whole of the Electoral College process. Keep Reading

Now the new wrinkle. Give the State’s electoral votes to the Presidential candidate who wins the popular vote thus insuring the demise of the electoral college and overriding the Constitution.

The Connecticut state Senate on Saturday voted in favor of a measure to give the state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote.

 

The move puts the state in a position to become the 11th, in addition to Washington, D.C., to join an interstate compact to pool their electoral college votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote.

The state Senate voted 21-14 in favor of the bill, with the support of three GOP lawmakers, The Guardian reported. The measure passed the state House on a 77-73 vote last month. Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy is expected to sign the legislation, according to the report.

With the addition of Connecticut’s seven electoral votes, the compact would have 172 in total. For the compact to go into effect nationally, it would need 270 electoral votes – the number needed for a candidate to win the presidency. More at The Hill

A new map courtesy of the Cook Political Report 

Easy to see how a few States with major Democrat numbers could rule Fly-Over country.

 

Bonus:

Here is a fun interactive map link that shows how America has voted in every election since 1824:

Presidential election results

Is changing the voting age to 16 a good idea?

The electoral college only becomes racist and sexist after a Republican wins

The argument for the electoral college begins. I caught these images on twitter and I think it sums up the Progressive’s analysis on an issue. Depends at the time one’s ox is being gored apparently.

 

slate2

The blue is where Hillary won the popular vote. The red is where Trump won the popular vote. THAT is the reason for the Electoral College!!

 

red-state

This chart also makes it clear why Democrats are terrified of rising sea levels.

crockett

 

%d bloggers like this: