National Popular Subversion
06/26/2007 | 09:22 AM
Senate Bill 954
By Paul Stam
June 21, 2007
Eighteen months after the November 2000 presidential election even the New York Times, after an exhaustive audit, conceded President Bush had defeated Vice President Gore in Florida’s presidential popular vote. Despite winning a plurality of the national popular vote Vice President Gore was ultimately defeated because George W. Bush won a simple majority of the Electoral Vote. Though rare, it was not the first time in history the Electoral count had been won by a presidential candidate who failed to win the most popular votes.
Because of the challenges to Florida’s vote counting process, America waited for almost two months to find out who was president. The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court saying Florida could not change its rules after the fact led many confused people to believe the U.S. Supreme Court decided the 2000 presidential election.
In the 20th century a variety of amendments were proposed to the U.S. Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College and elect the president by popular vote. Nevertheless, no such constitutional amendment has received much serious attention or support, even after the election of a Democratic-controlled U.S. Congress in 2006. But this hasn’t stopped those who still sting after the Florida Recount six years ago from attempting to undermine the Electoral College.
Quietly, without much press attention, North Carolina’s Democratic-controlled General Assembly has been moving forward to join a proposed Compact of States to pledge our 15 Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote for president without regard to the choice of North Carolina‘s voters.
The U.S. Constitution does direct “the legislatures” of the States to decide how their Electoral Votes will be cast following their presidential elections. But the same Constitution forbids the States from joining together into agreements or treaties without the approval of Congress.
While this “National Popular Vote” is being touted as a movement to elect the president by popular vote, it is really an “end run” around a proven process for amending the Constitution, and unless approved by Congress, it is an unconstitutional compact.
An awareness of the pitfalls of interstate “compacts” predates the U.S. Constitution, that smaller States in the new Union might be overwhelmed by more populated, richer States led the Founders to protect their interests not just in creating an Electoral College but in the creation of a U.S. Senate, which would become “the body of the States” as part of a bicameral Congress with the House of Representatives to balance out State power with a “body of the People.”
The potential for fraud in this National Popular Vote proposal is massive. This is especially true in a close election whose results might arise from flawed election laws in any of the other states, not just those who have joined this proposed Compact. If presidential results were expected to be close the temptation to engage in voter fraud would be nationwide instead of just being confined to the states with the closest results. The Democrats would run up the total in California and New York and Republicans would be tempted to do the same thing in Texas or Wyoming.
Many fail to understand there has never been a nationwide popular vote in the United States. There is no national mechanism for certifying the results of a national popular vote. The States certify the results of elections within their borders, and the national will is reflected in their certification of their individual Electors to the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate for election of the President and Vice President. Without any such mechanism, the potential for lawsuits would be enormous, far beyond what was seen in a single state in the weeks following the 2000 presidential election.
Joel Raupe
Administrative Assistant
joelr@ncleg.net
Rep. Paul Stam
Republican Leader
North Carolina House of Representatives
pauls@ncleg.net
By Paul Stam
June 21, 2007
Eighteen months after the November 2000 presidential election even the New York Times, after an exhaustive audit, conceded President Bush had defeated Vice President Gore in Florida’s presidential popular vote. Despite winning a plurality of the national popular vote Vice President Gore was ultimately defeated because George W. Bush won a simple majority of the Electoral Vote. Though rare, it was not the first time in history the Electoral count had been won by a presidential candidate who failed to win the most popular votes.
Because of the challenges to Florida’s vote counting process, America waited for almost two months to find out who was president. The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court saying Florida could not change its rules after the fact led many confused people to believe the U.S. Supreme Court decided the 2000 presidential election.
In the 20th century a variety of amendments were proposed to the U.S. Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College and elect the president by popular vote. Nevertheless, no such constitutional amendment has received much serious attention or support, even after the election of a Democratic-controlled U.S. Congress in 2006. But this hasn’t stopped those who still sting after the Florida Recount six years ago from attempting to undermine the Electoral College.
Quietly, without much press attention, North Carolina’s Democratic-controlled General Assembly has been moving forward to join a proposed Compact of States to pledge our 15 Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote for president without regard to the choice of North Carolina‘s voters.
The U.S. Constitution does direct “the legislatures” of the States to decide how their Electoral Votes will be cast following their presidential elections. But the same Constitution forbids the States from joining together into agreements or treaties without the approval of Congress.
While this “National Popular Vote” is being touted as a movement to elect the president by popular vote, it is really an “end run” around a proven process for amending the Constitution, and unless approved by Congress, it is an unconstitutional compact.
An awareness of the pitfalls of interstate “compacts” predates the U.S. Constitution, that smaller States in the new Union might be overwhelmed by more populated, richer States led the Founders to protect their interests not just in creating an Electoral College but in the creation of a U.S. Senate, which would become “the body of the States” as part of a bicameral Congress with the House of Representatives to balance out State power with a “body of the People.”
The potential for fraud in this National Popular Vote proposal is massive. This is especially true in a close election whose results might arise from flawed election laws in any of the other states, not just those who have joined this proposed Compact. If presidential results were expected to be close the temptation to engage in voter fraud would be nationwide instead of just being confined to the states with the closest results. The Democrats would run up the total in California and New York and Republicans would be tempted to do the same thing in Texas or Wyoming.
Many fail to understand there has never been a nationwide popular vote in the United States. There is no national mechanism for certifying the results of a national popular vote. The States certify the results of elections within their borders, and the national will is reflected in their certification of their individual Electors to the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate for election of the President and Vice President. Without any such mechanism, the potential for lawsuits would be enormous, far beyond what was seen in a single state in the weeks following the 2000 presidential election.
Joel Raupe
Administrative Assistant
joelr@ncleg.net
Rep. Paul Stam
Republican Leader
North Carolina House of Representatives
pauls@ncleg.net