Simple, and brilliant:
Post Reply   Forum

Posted by: TEEBONE ®

01/20/2020, 13:35:54

Author Profile Mail author Edit

Presidential chaos: 1 state may not report actual vote count on Election Day - WND

WND Staff
5-6 minutes 150w, 300w, 275w, 63w, 86w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" style="max-width: 100%; height: auto;" />

The campaign for a national popular vote for president has been gaining steam in recent years.

States that agree to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would cast all of their Electoral College votes for the candidate who ends up with the most popular votes nationwide.

Now comes a New Hampshire bill designed to throw a wrench in the campaign, even if it achieves its aim of compacting with enough states to control at least 270 Electoral College votes.

TRENDING: Trump pokes fun at himself during LSU White House ceremony, left loses it

The New Hampshire bill, which has multiple sponsors, would withhold the state's popular vote totals until after the Electoral College vote.

The state could release the percentage of statewide votes cast for each candidate.

But with no vote count from New Hampshire, no correct national popular vote total could be established.

The bill would prohibit "officers, employees, and contractors of the state of New Hampshire and its political subdivisions from releasing information relating to the number of votes cast in an election, subject to certain exceptions. The provisions of the bill are suspended until states that cumulatively possess a majority of the electoral votes have enacted the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in substantially the same form and the enactments by such states have taken effect in each state."

Defenders of the Electoral College system instituted by the Founders point out it gives power to the states, preserving political diversity by distributing power across the nation and preventing presidential campaigns from concentrating on major population centers.

'Could save our republic'

In a commentary for the Daily Signal, retired lawyer Tara Ross said the New Hampshire bill "sounds crazy and anti-democratic."

"In reality, however, such proposals could save our republic: They will complicate efforts to implement the National Popular Vote legislation that has been working its way through state legislatures," she said.

Ross explained that the compact goes into effect when states holding 270 electors — enough to win an election —have agreed to participate.

So far, 15 states plus Washington, D.C., have signed, with 196 electoral votes among them.

Ross noted that the organization National Popular Vote is pushing hard to get the additional 74 votes needed.

Legislation has been introduced in states such as Virginia (13 electors) and Missouri (10 electors), and lobbyists are pushing for Florida's 29 electors.

New Hampshire, she said, is trying to throw a wrench in the works.

"What if a state such as New Hampshire simply refused to release its popular vote totals, as has been proposed? Or what if states were to release totals for winning candidates, but didn’t report any total for the losing candidates? National Popular Vote proponents will claim that such proposals violate federal reporting requirements, but they don’t. Those federal laws cannot require a state to turn in popular vote totals."

There are other suggestions to foil the NPV, she said.

"What if a state were to change its election system altogether? In Texas, for example, voters currently cast one ballot for an entire slate of 38 presidential electors. What if each potential elector were listed on the ballot instead? Every Texan would be given 38 votes and asked to vote for 38 individual electors. Texans could vote for Republican electors, Democratic electors, independent electors—or even some of each. The 38 individuals with the highest vote totals would represent Texas in the Electoral College."

"How would National Popular Vote states pinpoint a national tally with so much information missing?"

Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak recently vetoed his legislature's plan to join the NPV.

But Colorado's extreme-left governor, Jared Polis, last year signed a bill adding his state to the plan, although the law is being challenged.

Schlafly: 'Legalizing vote-stealing'

The late Phyllis Schlafly wrote a column about the NPV campaign in 2011.

"The NPV slogan 'Every Vote Equal' is dishonest because the NPV proposal is based on legalizing vote-stealing. For example, Texas or Louisiana could be forced to cast … votes for a candidate who won more votes in other states, such as New York," she said.

Constitutional and legal experts say that if the plan ever is implemented, the inevitable legal challenges could make the winner uncertain for months or even longer.

They also note the Constitution forbids states from entering into compacts with other states without congressional approval.


Democrats wouldn't buy a clue if it was government subsidized.

Post Reply | Recommend | Alert View All   Previous | Next | Current page

Replies to this message