11–20 of 932 posts
My (cynical) assumption is that this will be obeyed insofar as it helps bring about the desired outcome by those in power. It will be disregarded if it would shift the outcome in the other direction.
Let's imagine a state signs this and is a tipping point state for the presidential election. If this compact has any effect, it will be for the state's electors to vote against the popular vote in that state, resulting in the election of the undesired president according to the state's voters. Nothing wrong with that constitutionally, but I suspect the politicians will feel differently after the voters express their…
That's why I'm not too worried about it. If it would really change the result, it's easy for a State to hit the pause button.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this actually does pass the tipping point, nobody will even be counting electors any more, they will only be counting the popular vote. The electors will be considered just a formality.
Vote counts will still be reported at every level, but electors will all cast their votes for the national popular vote winner. It will be easy enough to note which states' vote counts favor candidate B, despite the national popular vote favoring candidate A. As parent says, that's the design, but I'm sure there will be upset people in those states.
There are people upset with the plurality winner getting all the states votes, too.
Another thing to abolish - winner-takes-all system, which prevents wider parties variety.
People who want to get away from the big cities and live a different kind of life with different priorities (and different legislative interests), shouldn't be totally shut out, should they? Even though I live in a giant urban area, I wouldn't want to feel pressured to due so due to lack of political stake if I move elsewhere.
Another thing to abolish - winner-takes-all system, which prevents wider parties variety.
An argument I heard recently against this is, if abolished, politicians won't have incentives to campaign in rural territories, and they won't be accountable to rural territories. That basically makes sense. The EC is the only thing that really gives rural territories any stake, as the majority population has shifted to larger urban centers. People who want to get away from the big cities and live a different kind of…
An argument I heard recently against this is, if abolished, politicians won't have incentives to campaign in rural territories, and they won't be accountable to rural territories. That basically makes sense. The EC is the only thing that really gives rural territories any stake, as the majority population has shifted to larger urban centers. People who want to get away from the big cities and live a different kind of…