Liberals hate the Electoral College  because they feel a national vote would give them a political edge.
Sure, they’ll sing a song about listening to the voice of “the people” — but it really always comes down to the fact they want more Democrat presidents.
Power is always the motivating factor in politics.
But the Founders had some ideas on how our elections should be run, independently of the political maneuvering of the parties.
The Founding Fathers gave the power to the people and helpfully documented it in the Constitution. The Electoral College was ultimately a compromise between allowing a congressional vote and a popular vote of qualified citizens to determine our commander-in-chief.
The best attribute of the Electoral College is that it forces candidates to appeal to the voters of a number of states, both big and small, instead of simply camping out in one heavily populated area and running up the scoreboard.
This means whomever is elected, by necessity, will have supporters spread all over the nation, not just in one populated clump.
As Dan McLaughlin wrote in National Review , “Our American system as a whole — both by design and by experience — demands the patient building of broad, diverse political coalitions over time to effect significant change.”
This system has worked for our nation very well.
However, the Campaign for the National Popular Vote (NPV) is trying to undermine the whole thing. Under this group’s subversive and unconstitutional plan, each state vows to award its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.
In other words, if the voters of Colorado vote for Donald Trump but Bernie Sanders wins the popular vote — the electors of Colorado will be forced to vote for Sanders.
This coalition compact will only kick in when a majority of presidential electors sign on.
I’ll go ahead and do the math for you. The 11 most populous states have 271 electoral votes in total. That’s all that is needed to elect a president.
This attempt is a brazen end-run around the Electoral College, as the Left cannot muster the support to amend the Constitution to remove the requirement for the Electoral College. They’ve tried and failed to do this the constitutional way, via amendment — which would require the consent of two-thirds of the Congress and three-fourths of the states.
Instead of admitting their failure and moving on, they are attempting to circumvent the constitutional parameters the Founders gave us.
The NPV group likes to talk a big game, using phrases and words that appeal to American’s sense of fairness. “Every vote equal,” they cry.
Who would be against that?
Actually, that’s more than a rhetorical question. If it is such a brilliant solution, why not present it to the people with the option of amending the Constitution to reflect their beliefs on the matter?
I am the head of the Convention of States (COS) project, which is using Article V of the Constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and impose term limits on its officials and members of Congress. Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to call a Convention of States to propose amendments.
At COS, we do not support the NPV.
COS is bringing about change to empower the people — yet NPV is attempting to bring about change by ignoring the people’s will.
COS is in the Constitution. NPV is blatantly unconstitutional.
COS believes bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t be allowed to make sweeping decisions that impact millions of Americans.
NPV is hoping to give state bureaucrats unprecedented power.
NPV advocates claim to be “for the people” — while really they are for the Democratic Party.
If they succeed, America loses.
We can’t let that happen.