Mass. Legislature approves plan to bypass Electoral College

[jhaag]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/07/mass_legislatur.html?p1=News_links

By Martin Finucane, Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Poll: Do you think the Electoral College system should stay?

"What we are submitting is the idea that the president should be selected by the majority of people in the United States of America," Senator James B. Eldridge, an Acton Democrat, said before the Senate voted to enact the bill.

Under the new bill, he said, "Every vote will be of the same weight across the country."

But Senate minority leader Richard Tisei said the state was meddling with a system that was "tried and true" since the founding of the country.

"We've had a lot of bad ideas come through this chamber over the years, but this is going to be one of the worst ideas that has surfaced and actually garnered some support," said Tisei, who is also the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor.

The bill, which passed on a 28-to-9 vote, now heads to Democratic Governor Deval Patrick's desk. The governor has said in the past that he supports the bill, said his spokeswoman Kim Haberlin.

Under the law, which was enacted by the House last week, all 12 of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally.

Supporters are campaigning, state by state, to get such bills enacted. Once states accounting for a majority of the electoral votes (or 270 of 538) have enacted the laws, the candidate winning the most votes nationally would be assured a majority of Electoral College votes. That would hold true no matter how the other states vote and how their electoral votes are distributed.

Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland, and Washington have already approved the legislation, according to the National Popular Vote campaign's website. The new system would only go into effect once a sufficient number of states have passed laws that would make it work.

The current Electoral College system is confusing and causes presidential candidates to focus unduly on a handful of battleground states, supporters say. They also say that the popular vote winner has lost in four of the nation's 56 elections.

Presidential candidates now "ignore wide swaths of the country" they consider strong blue or red states and focus their campaigning on contested states, Eldridge said. If the president were picked by national popular vote, he argued, candidates would spread their attention out more evenly.

"That's really what we're talking about is making sure that every voter, no matter where they live, that they're being reached out to," he said.

Opponents say the current system works. They are concerned about a possible scenario where Candidate X wins nationally, but Candidate Y has won in Massachusetts. In that case, all of the state's 12 electoral votes would go to Candidate X, the candidate who was not supported by Massachusetts voters.

Tisei also criticized the proponents for not following the normal procedures to seek a constitutional amendment.

"The thing about this that bothers me the most is it's so sneaky. This is the way that liberals do things a lot of times, very sneaky," he said. "This is sort of an end run around the Constitution."

The measure passed both branches of the Legislature in 2008 but did not make it all the way through the process.

[chevysoldier]

Moar fear.

[SAMBUSA]

Moar fear.

Thats my line

[chevysoldier]

Thats my line

Ibts

[jbot]

chevy, why you gotta be jocking sambusa's style, brah?

[chevysoldier]

chevy, why you gotta be jocking sambusa's style, brah?

i just wanted in before the sambusa.

[Likwid]

Our Electoral College is the best system going. Mob rule voting would absolutely pummel minority groups of any nature.

minorities like white?

[John]

Our Electoral College is the best system going. Mob rule voting would absolutely pummel minority groups of any nature.

do minority groups have any real chance of winning now?

[ReconRat]

I approve of removing the Electoral College. It was more or less put in place to make sure the citizens weren't stupid and did something stupid. In other words, it kept the actual power of the vote with the States, and not the Citizens. We don't need it.

edit: it's also an insult to all citizens, and a disruption of majority rule in voting.

[The King]

I approve of removing the Electoral College. It was more or less put in place to make sure the citizens weren't stupid and did something stupid. In other words, it kept the actual power of the vote with the States, and not the Citizens. We don't need it.

edit: it's also an insult to all citizens, and a disruption of majority rule in voting.

Are you kidding? Remember the MORONS in florida who couldn't figure our how to use a punch card?

WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, we are a Republic. The system should absolutely not be changed.

[kawi kid]

its an old person state what do you expect???

[ReconRat]

Are you kidding? Remember the MORONS in florida who couldn't figure our how to use a punch card?

WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, we are a Republic. The system should absolutely not be changed.

Actually, the USA is a Democratic Republic. A true Republic could be something like France, Turkey, or Vietnam. Although it is true that a Republic also votes by either a direct vote, or by a council that chooses for voters.

And no matter how hard we try, there will always be somebody that punches the wrong button/switch/card. We'll just have to live with that, and not make so much of it. It has become a part of the voting process.

[ReconRat]

its an old person state what do you expect???

Popular misconception. There are more retired peoples in Ohio than Florida. Except for that SnowBird month, when somehow they all show up down South at the same time...

[cg2112]

Sweet, if we remove the electoral college, our Presidents will be elected by New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia, etc. No real need for farmers to vote anymore.

[ReconRat]

Be aware that if 4 of the 56 elections were out of whack, that changing to a direct vote would have the same odds of a "chance of out of whack". Elections would continue to be 93% correct regardless of whatever challenge would be generated over results.

[ReconRat]

Sweet, if we remove the electoral college, our Presidents will be elected by New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia, etc. No real need for farmers to vote anymore.

But wait.... that's where all the "Electoral College" votes are from. Not a big difference...

edit: the actual difference, is that competition won't be for a majority of large urban districts anymore. It would shift to having to be a majority of it all. Including the lesser states, the rural areas, and a fairly large percent of the US population that really isn't represented at this time.

Edited July 30, 2010 by ReconRat

[ReconRat]

What people don't see, is that whichever party wins a district, anywhere in the country, that district is then analyzed, borders shuffled, plans made, nefarious plots plotted... to maneuver the voting patterns of each district in an attempt to continue winning those Electoral College votes. This is just wrong, a waste of money and time, and is a simple yanking around of the citizens.

In other words... we aren't really voting...

[AOW]

I approve of removing the Electoral College. It was more or less put in place to make sure the citizens weren't stupid and did something stupid. In other words, it kept the actual power of the vote with the States, and not the Citizens. We don't need it.

edit: it's also an insult to all citizens, and a disruption of majority rule in voting.

THANK THE GODS that there are others of intelligence.