Effort Underway To Change Electoral College Results To Reflect Popular Vote

Nancy Vogel in the LA Times reports that the California Assembly has passed "a measure to pledge the state's Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote." … "The bill is part of a 3-month-old movement driven by a Bay Area lawyer and a Stanford computer science professor. The same 888-word bill is pending in four other states and is expected to be introduced in every state by January, its sponsors say. The legislation would not take effect until enough states passed such laws to make up a majority of the Electoral College votes — a minimum of 13 states, depending on population." --- The primary idea, as reported in the Times, is to oblige candidates to campaign more in California, as a means to enhance the importance of the state's vote. But reporter Vogel also notes that this change could very well likely pit big cities against small states. It's noteworthy that this method does not actually change the electoral college at all, per se. Article. II. Section. 1. of the Constitution says: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." (The 12th Amendment, which altered the original text of Article II Section 1, is not germane.) So there would actually be no technical change to the electoral college architecture itself. The change would be in the "manner" that state legislatures "direct" elector appointment. The Times article notes that "In the New York Legislature, Republicans introduced the bill, … and they support it in Illinois, Missouri and Colorado." But the California Assembly got only one Republican vote. California Republican Assemblyman Chuck DeVore voiced this argument, with no acknowledgment whatsoever of any irony, given the current Republican control of all branches of the federal government: "Direct democracies were properly seen by the founding fathers as very unstable because 50% plus one of the people can vote themselves anything and run roughshod over the rights of the minority, run roughshod over rule of law," DeVore said. "That is what the Electoral College is all about." via Taegan Goddard