I'm certainly not an expert, but wouldn't that require a constitutional amendment? And wouldn't that entails supermajority in both houses and ratification in 3/4th of the states? That is simply...
I'm certainly not an expert, but wouldn't that require a constitutional amendment? And wouldn't that entails supermajority in both houses and ratification in 3/4th of the states? That is simply never going to happen
I'd just like to point out that if 34 states vote up an amendment, that's the end of it, and the federal government has no input - not congress, not the executive branch, and not even the supreme...
I'd just like to point out that if 34 states vote up an amendment, that's the end of it, and the federal government has no input - not congress, not the executive branch, and not even the supreme court. The states themselves still retain the power to rewrite the constitution, including replacing the entire thing with a new version, any time you can get all 34 of them to agree on and ratify a document that has the same exact text in each of those 34 votes.
One of the reasons they don't do this is because nobody seems to be able to get all 34 of them to vote on the same exact text at the same time, which is why amendments continually proposed by many of them that are essentially looking for the same thing get shot down all the time. The fed is quite happy to use that technicality to block any changes.
The whole process (which is murky and not well defined with plenty of room for arguments, interpretation, and infighting) is laid out in Article V. It's called an Article V Convention if/when it ever happens. There's a nice summary of the murky history of this often-overlooked relationship between the states and the federal government.
If you look at the list of applications I think you'll notice certain common, recurring themes in many of the state applications, particularly in recent times. Reforming the electoral college is most definitely one of them, as are term limits for federal politicians and a balanced budget amendment that ends this government shutdown business. Massive campaign finance reform is also on the list.
So, the question becomes, how do you get 34+ states to all team up, without first having the convention (which congress will deny) - so that all 34+ of them ask for the convention at the same time, and all ask for the same things, using the same words, at the same time? That's never been done before in American politics. This little pact some of the states are joining to change their voting seems like the early beginnings of that process. Perhaps they'll finally realize that they hold the real power, not congress. Time will tell.
Edit: Sorry, that's 34 states, not 38. 34 is all it takes, simple 2/3 majority.
nope! not in this implementation. this is specifically a state pact thingy which just says that the state's electoral college delegates will vote with whoever wins the popular vote once the number...
I'm certainly not an expert, but wouldn't that require a constitutional amendment? And wouldn't that entails supermajority in both houses and ratification in 3/4th of the states? That is simply never going to happen
nope! not in this implementation. this is specifically a state pact thingy which just says that the state's electoral college delegates will vote with whoever wins the popular vote once the number of states in pact reaches the 270 needed electoral votes to win an election.
I know that certain states are gerrymandered badly, but it also seems unfair to disenfranchise the minority voters in a state with an all-or-nothing delegate system. If anything, the people would...
I know that certain states are gerrymandered badly, but it also seems unfair to disenfranchise the minority voters in a state with an all-or-nothing delegate system. If anything, the people would be better served by a ranked choice type of system that is implemented at a federal level.
This sort of popular vote change only serves to further entrench the two party system's hold on the presidency - one that has our country so polarized - and is going to continue to serve one party much more with the up coming demographic shifts.
President was specifically left out of the text of Main Question 5: https://ballotpedia.org/Maine_Ranked_Choice_Voting_Initiative,_Question_5_(2016)#Full_text . So, while Maine also (since 1972)...
So, while Maine also (since 1972) allocates its electoral votes proportionally, I suspect those votes will still be chosen as FPTP (one vote for each of the two congressional districts and two at-large votes based on state totals).
I'm certainly not an expert, but wouldn't that require a constitutional amendment? And wouldn't that entails supermajority in both houses and ratification in 3/4th of the states? That is simply never going to happen
I'd just like to point out that if 34 states vote up an amendment, that's the end of it, and the federal government has no input - not congress, not the executive branch, and not even the supreme court. The states themselves still retain the power to rewrite the constitution, including replacing the entire thing with a new version, any time you can get all 34 of them to agree on and ratify a document that has the same exact text in each of those 34 votes.
One of the reasons they don't do this is because nobody seems to be able to get all 34 of them to vote on the same exact text at the same time, which is why amendments continually proposed by many of them that are essentially looking for the same thing get shot down all the time. The fed is quite happy to use that technicality to block any changes.
The whole process (which is murky and not well defined with plenty of room for arguments, interpretation, and infighting) is laid out in Article V. It's called an Article V Convention if/when it ever happens. There's a nice summary of the murky history of this often-overlooked relationship between the states and the federal government.
If you look at the list of applications I think you'll notice certain common, recurring themes in many of the state applications, particularly in recent times. Reforming the electoral college is most definitely one of them, as are term limits for federal politicians and a balanced budget amendment that ends this government shutdown business. Massive campaign finance reform is also on the list.
So, the question becomes, how do you get 34+ states to all team up, without first having the convention (which congress will deny) - so that all 34+ of them ask for the convention at the same time, and all ask for the same things, using the same words, at the same time? That's never been done before in American politics. This little pact some of the states are joining to change their voting seems like the early beginnings of that process. Perhaps they'll finally realize that they hold the real power, not congress. Time will tell.
Edit: Sorry, that's 34 states, not 38. 34 is all it takes, simple 2/3 majority.
nope! not in this implementation. this is specifically a state pact thingy which just says that the state's electoral college delegates will vote with whoever wins the popular vote once the number of states in pact reaches the 270 needed electoral votes to win an election.
I know that certain states are gerrymandered badly, but it also seems unfair to disenfranchise the minority voters in a state with an all-or-nothing delegate system. If anything, the people would be better served by a ranked choice type of system that is implemented at a federal level.
This sort of popular vote change only serves to further entrench the two party system's hold on the presidency - one that has our country so polarized - and is going to continue to serve one party much more with the up coming demographic shifts.
what you propose takes a constitutional amendment though, and that's just not going to happen realistically speaking.
President was specifically left out of the text of Main Question 5: https://ballotpedia.org/Maine_Ranked_Choice_Voting_Initiative,_Question_5_(2016)#Full_text .
So, while Maine also (since 1972) allocates its electoral votes proportionally, I suspect those votes will still be chosen as FPTP (one vote for each of the two congressional districts and two at-large votes based on state totals).