Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Electoral Count Act Reform

Wed Jul 20, 2022 11:54 pm

A bipartisan Senate Committee has proposed reforms to the Electoral Count Act, to prevent abuse in Presidential elections. This is a good start, but requires approval of full Senate and House.

1. Requires 20% of members in each house of Congress to lodge an objection to electoral count certification.

2. Creates an expedited judicial tribunal to adjudicate disputes regarding electors. Appeals would go to the Supreme Court.

3. Only slates of electors submitted by the governor of a state, after selection by the state legislature, can be accepted by Congress for certification.

4. The term "Failed Election" is clarified to require "extraordinary & catastrophic events", prior to declaration by a state.

5. The Vice President has no authority to alter the certification of an election by Congress, serving only in an administrative capacity as chair of the session.

6. In a disputed election, both candidates must be given access to federal transition funds during the dispute.

7. Increases penalties for intimidation or threat against any candidate, voter, or election official, to maximum 2 years in prison.

8. Increases requirements for preservation of election records.

9. Provides assistance to the US Post Office in proper handling of mail-in ballots

10. Re-authorizes for 5 years, a federal commission to work with states to improve voting laws and practices.

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -count-act
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 16089
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 1:54 am

For some reason I still feel like the GOP will find a way to torpedo this, but i feel like it is a good step. # 7 and # 8 will require a bit more enforcement.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 2:13 am

Only slates of electors submitted by the governor of a state, after selection by the state legislature, can be accepted by Congress for certification.

I take it as meaning that electors need botha state's governor and legislature's agreement?

In a disputed election, both candidates must be given access to federal transition funds during the dispute.

What if a minor party with a few hundred votes dispute the election result?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9997
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 3:22 am

I take it to mean the governor merely transmits the legislature’s slate of electors. He is the state official, but does not have veto power over the slate.
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:28 am

c933103 wrote:
Only slates of electors submitted by the governor of a state, after selection by the state legislature, can be accepted by Congress for certification.

I take it as meaning that electors need botha state's governor and legislature's agreement?


As GalaxyFlyer said, the legislature selects the electors and transmits them to the governor, who like the Vice President, has only an administrative role in forwarding to Congress. This prevents other than an official source for the slate of electors.

In a disputed election, both candidates must be given access to federal transition funds during the dispute.

What if a minor party with a few hundred votes dispute the election result?


#1 requires 20% of the members of each house to lodge a dispute. So the minor party would have to be large enough to hold at least 127 seats in Congress.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:48 am

In 2020 some state legislatures tried to pick electors different from election result. Wouldn't having state legislature picking electors and have state governor only having administrative role, enable such behavior?
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 5:03 am

c933103 wrote:
In 2020 some state legislatures tried to pick electors different from election result. Wouldn't having state legislature picking electors and have state governor only having administrative role, enable such behavior?


No, that did not happen. Every state legislature submitted an official slate of electors determined by the popular vote, as required by law.

What did happen, is that some state legislature members, also separately submitted alternate slates of electors. Then their Congressional members lodged an objection to the official slates during the certification. The plan was that if a dispute was raised and an alternate slate was available, the Vice President would choose the alternate slate.

As it happened, Pence refused to cooperate, and for each dispute that was raised, Congress voted to certify the official slate.

Under the proposed reforms, there would be no alternate slates, and the Vice President could not alter the certification of Congress. Also the dispute threshold is raised from 1 member of each house, to 20% of the members of each house. So from 2 votes, to 127 votes. This means that agreement between different states would need to exist, and no one state could lodge a dispute by itself.
 
hh65man
Posts: 326
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:52 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 5:35 am

For Federal elections, there should be federally mandated guidelines, rules that ALL states must abide by equally. Not 50 states running a federal election differently, doing it however they want to. State elections they can do differently. With the Electoral business end reform certainly is much needed also. I highly doubt ol Mitch would allow much of anything near reform to happen. His sole job is to interrupt, not help or support. Just my two cents from afar…
 
art
Posts: 5174
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 11:41 am

hh65man wrote:
For Federal elections, there should be federally mandated guidelines, rules that ALL states must abide by equally. Not 50 states running a federal election differently, doing it however they want to. State elections they can do differently. With the Electoral business end reform certainly is much needed also. I highly doubt ol Mitch would allow much of anything near reform to happen. His sole job is to interrupt, not help or support. Just my two cents from afar…


What is gained by different states running elections in different ways? I see no benefit.
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 3:35 pm

art wrote:
hh65man wrote:
For Federal elections, there should be federally mandated guidelines, rules that ALL states must abide by equally. Not 50 states running a federal election differently, doing it however they want to. State elections they can do differently. With the Electoral business end reform certainly is much needed also. I highly doubt ol Mitch would allow much of anything near reform to happen. His sole job is to interrupt, not help or support. Just my two cents from afar…


What is gained by different states running elections in different ways? I see no benefit.


Within the Constitution, it was part of the founder's intention to firmly establish state's rights, and limit the powers of the federal government. If there was federal control of elections, that could be one path for a strong federation to form a singular nation-state. The founders were extremely distrustful of centralized authority, so purposely gave the states various roles that could not be co-opted by the federal government.

It makes sense in that context, but not from the standpoint of uniformity or efficiency. The founders would probably be surprised by the strength of the federal government today. But the world is a lot smaller now, and the US has to interact with it as a single entity. That's provided within the Constitution, but also there are still strong protections for the states, and for individuals.
 
hh65man
Posts: 326
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:52 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:08 pm

When various states make it difficult for voters, in a federal election then change needs to happen. Why would having Federally mandated guidelines and rules be an overreach. It’s pretty simple really. Casting a ballot shouldnt be made difficult, it’s supposed to be incredibly easy if anything.
In Australia we all have to register when we turn voting age, and then get fined if we don’t vote. In Norway everyone is automatically registered pretty much when they are born when they get a birth number, also known as a ID number. Maybe use a Social Security Number, be able to vote anywhere in the state you reside, or better yet anywhere in the countries limits.
I am pretty sure the founding fathers would be aghast at how things are run today.
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 5:03 pm

hh65man wrote:
I am pretty sure the founding fathers would be aghast at how things are run today.


Agreed they would be dumbfounded, but perhaps in the opposite sense. The federal government has grown in strength, size and authority. The question is whether that's a bad or inappropriate thing. It has pluses and minuses.

I've been voting for 40 years in the US, never found it to be difficult or managed badly. You register in your locality so they know which ballot to give you. You provide proof of residency in that locality. They verify your residency and registration status. And you vote.

The circus that unfolded in 2020 was all nonsense, in truth 2020 was not much different than other elections, in terms of authenticity. It just had a much larger percentage of mail-in and early voting, due to COVID. But otherwise was unremarkable.

So all the hype is a manufactured issue from a President that saw he was going to lose, tried to preempt his loss beforehand, and undo his loss afterwards. That's basically the whole controversy in a nutshell. There is not some massive awful problem with voting being regulated by the states, or with fraud.

The federal election commission has a role in helping states to create good election laws and practices. The Voting Rights Act gives individuals a means of disputing voting laws that are discriminatory or unfair. Those are good and proper means of election oversight by the federal government, that are consistent with state's rights, as guaranteed in the Constitution.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24955
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 6:33 pm

Fake electors from seven states signed documents they were legitimate electors

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/21/11064486 ... dam-schiff

Maybe the president should be forced to uphold his sworn oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, so help me God" instead of making new laws Republicans will simply work around to create a one party theocratic nation with a king. Something the Founding Fathers never wanted.
 
bhill
Posts: 1932
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 10:38 pm

I think the Electoral College is waaay past it's value. The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?

"According to Alexander Hamilton, the Electoral College is if “not perfect, it is at least excellent,” because it ensured “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” "

Boyo boyo....did he ever get that wrong.....
 
User avatar
NIKV69
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Thu Jul 21, 2022 11:52 pm

[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..[/quote]

Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere
 
Kent350787
Posts: 2574
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:08 am

NIKV69 wrote:
[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..


Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere[/quote]

The Senate is the States' house, where the small states are overrepresented compared to their populations. Why shouldn't a majority of voters elect the President?
 
hh65man
Posts: 326
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:52 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:51 am

Exactly, when one can lose the popular vote by millions and still win the high office doesn’t make sense anymore. Why bother voting if you are in a dominant state of red or blue if your vote won’t count. Seems to happen at times, no?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 15982
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 9:32 am

The issue is so evident because you have a presidential system. So everyone in the country votes for the president, yet every vote doesn't count, that's an issue.

Many democracies don't have presidents, if they follow the Westminster system all votes aren't equal either, but it's less evident. Usually the winner is still the party with the most votes, it's just that it gets disproportionate representation in the legislature. A problem the US also has of course, it's a feature of first by the post elections. Except in the US the party with less votes manages to get more representation than it should through gerrymandering.

Then you have proportional representation like in many EU countries (and Israel), which is objectively the most democratic. And has the added feature of forcing parties to compromise, because getting an outright majority is almost impossible.

If we imagine proportional representation in the US, neither the GOP nor the Dems would get a majority. And these parties would break up, for sure.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14424
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 3:54 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..


Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere[/quote]

But imagine how much more equitable the EC would be if they represented all the voters in the state and were split proportionally rather than winner takes all. That would give GOP voters in States like California a voice, and Dem voters in GOP states a voice.
 
victrola
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:21 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..


Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere[/quote]

Screw the states. States are just chunks of land. Democracy should be about people. You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.

But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24955
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:01 pm

victrola wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..


Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere


Screw the states. States are just chunks of land. Democracy should be about people. You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.

But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.[/quote]

Many people have been saying for decades the Electoral College must be abolished. It is the same people who want to preserve democracy. Not Republicans, but everyone else. But, because the minority party thinks it is a bad idea, Republicans want to keep the electoral college. They know they can gerrymander and even take up arms (see: January 6, 2021) to get the result they want. Republicans do not care about democracy or the Constitution or the rule of law. They only care about dictating power. Micromanaging us all.
 
FGITD
Posts: 2184
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 8:52 pm

victrola wrote:
My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.


Exactly my problem with the electoral college. I understand the basic need for it, however much I disagree with it. It's true purpose comes out whenever a candidate (usually dem) loses a certain swing state, and the claim is that they didn't visit/do enough campaigning there. That basic argument is saying that those people's votes count for more, therefore they should be catered to more closely. It grants certain citizens a higher proportional power with their vote. Candidates don't campaign for Americans, they campaign for Iowa, Florida, New Hampshire, etc. Of course it's disenfranchising, imagine you live in CA, a state that contributes enormously to the federal govt, but someone from Wyoming's vote counts for 4x more than yours...

There's also the simple fact that when the majority of the people vote for x, but y still wins...something is clearly wrong. It's becoming a tyranny of the minority. Gotta appease those small states that don't contribute to the country and leech tax money!
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Fri Jul 22, 2022 9:35 pm

The proposed Electoral Count reforms appear to have broad support in Congress. I wonder if they will wait for recommendations from the Jan 6 committee.

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/22/11129370 ... ad-support
 
User avatar
NIKV69
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:24 am

seb146 wrote:
Democracy should be about people.


You mean just the people in California and NY right?

seb146 wrote:
You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.


How does it do that? if you got your way your vote would be the only vote that mattered and that rancher in WY would have no vote.

seb146 wrote:
But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.


This is another figment of your imagination. Remember to win the white house you need to carry purple states so this "extremist" argument of yours falls short as usual.
 
QF7
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:38 am

seb146 wrote:

Many people have been saying for decades the Electoral College must be abolished.


Which as we all know would require a constitutional amendment, which is very hard to do (for good reason).

However, the problem could be substantially solved if states would abandon winner-take-all and instead go to proportional allocation of Electors. For example, today if a candidate wins 49% of the vote in Florida they receive zero Electors and the candidate who won 51% receives all the Electors. Under proportional allocation the recipient of 49% of the votes would receive one less than half of Florida’s Electors. I.e., 14 EC votes to the other candidate’s 15 EC votes, instead of zero to 29.

If only the 10 most populous states had proportional allocation Hillary would have won the Electoral College in 2016.

State Legislatures have the constitutional power to make this change today, if they are so inclined.

Note that a couple of states already do not use winner-take-all, Maine for one, although it is not quite proportional allocation either. But it does show that it is up to the states.

Now it is certainly true that there would still be gerrymandering and other games being played, so it wouldn’t be a perfect solution, but it would bring the Electoral College much more in line with the popular vote.

QF7
Last edited by QF7 on Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
Kent350787
Posts: 2574
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:38 am

The is already the “State’s chamber”, the Senate, where the votes of residents of smaller states count more than larger states. I can’t see any good argument why preference should also be given via the electoral college in this day and age.

The smaller states already kill legislation in the Senate.
Last edited by Kent350787 on Sat Jul 23, 2022 1:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
QF7
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:57 am

Kent350787 wrote:
The is already the “State’s chamber”, the Senate, where the votes of residents of smaller states count more than latger states.

That is certainly true, but then it calls into question the very purpose of States.

Is a State an entity with some degree of sovereignty, self-determination, and representative of the will of its own citizens? Or is a State merely a sub-division of the Federal government?

Probably a discussion best left to another thread but it really does get to a fundamental question about the structure of the country.

QF7
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 1:14 am

QF7 wrote:

Is a State an entity with some degree of sovereignty, self-determination, and representative of the will of its own citizens? Or is a State merely a sub-division of the Federal government?

Probably a discussion best left to another thread but it really does get to a fundamental question about the structure of the country.

QF7


The Constitution defines the states as a federated union, so legally they are locally self-governing entities that agree to participation in the federation. The federated union acts as a sovereign state in foreign affairs, and to the extent permitted by the Constitution, in domestic affairs. This is also the principle involved in secession, where a state would withdraw from the union.

The concept of the union is largely forgotten today, with our strong federal government, but it remains the legal basis of our nation.

A federated state (which may also be referred to as a state, a province, a region, a canton, a land, a governorate, an oblast, an emirate or a country) is a territorial and constitutional community forming part of a federation. Such states differ from fully sovereign states, in that they do not have full sovereign powers, as the sovereign powers have been divided between the federated states and the central or federal government. Importantly, federated states do not have standing as entities of international law. Instead, the federal union as a single entity is the sovereign state for purposes of international law. Depending on the constitutional structure of a particular federation, a federated state can hold various degrees of legislative, judicial, and administrative jurisdiction over a defined geographic territory and is a form of regional government.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_state
 
Avatar2go
Topic Author
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 1:25 am

QF7 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

Many people have been saying for decades the Electoral College must be abolished.


Which as we all know would require a constitutional amendment, which is very hard to do (for good reason).

However, the problem could be substantially solved if states would abandon winner-take-all and instead go to proportional allocation of Electors. For example, today if a candidate wins 49% of the vote in Florida they receive zero Electors and the candidate who won 51% receives all the Electors. Under proportional allocation the recipient of 49% of the votes would receive one less than half of Florida’s Electors. I.e., 14 EC votes to the other candidate’s 15 EC votes, instead of zero to 29.

If only the 10 most populous states had proportional allocation Hillary would have won the Electoral College in 2016.

State Legislatures have the constitutional power to make this change today, if they are so inclined.

Note that a couple of states already do not use winner-take-all, Maine for one, although it is not quite proportional allocation either. But it does show that it is up to the states.

Now it is certainly true that there would still be gerrymandering and other games being played, so it wouldn’t be a perfect solution, but it would bring the Electoral College much more in line with the popular vote.

QF7


This is a good point, the states have the power to alter the electoral college attribution and counting process. Nebraska and Maine have already done this.

However in 2016, the best Clinton could have done in the electoral college, was to deny Trump the 270 votes needed for victory, and put the election in the House. The only way Clinton could win outright is to abolish the electoral college and use the popular vote alone.

https://www.270towin.com/alternative-el ... n-methods/
 
FLYFIRSTCLASS
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2022 7:41 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 3:59 pm

I wish we would just get rid of this silly electoral college system. It really does not make any sense. You get the popular vote but still lost? So basically our elections are in the balance of a handful of swing states. If you are a diehard supporter of the GOP in a state that typically goes democrat by a large margin, it would make it pointless to go vote.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24955
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 4:53 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Democracy should be about people.


You mean just the people in California and NY right?


No, I mean "liberals" in rural areas. I mean both sides having a voice. I mean stopping this nonsense going on in some states where Republicans can simply ignore the will of the people and do whatever Republicans want.

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.


How does it do that? if you got your way your vote would be the only vote that mattered and that rancher in WY would have no vote.


No. If I had my way, the majority of people in the country would decide the president and not a handful of Republicans. That was the whole point of fake electors and trying to stop the Senate confirmation on January 6. So they could throw the vote to the Republican controlled House to declare their king winner.

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.


This is another figment of your imagination. Remember to win the white house you need to carry purple states so this "extremist" argument of yours falls short as usual.


This is why Republicans are always playing victim and crying foul when their side loses and trying to find way to win when they lose. Republicans still believe millions of votes were cast fraudulently but have yet to prove that ever happened. Our elections are the most secure in the world, until January 6. Besides abolishing the Electoral College and replace it with the will of the people, we need civics classes ahead of every election. Not the spin of "if communist liberal Democrats win, patriots lose" Republican civics, but actual "here is how the Constitution works" civics.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9997
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 10:28 pm

seb146 wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Democracy should be about people.


You mean just the people in California and NY right?


No, I mean "liberals" in rural areas. I mean both sides having a voice. I mean stopping this nonsense going on in some states where Republicans can simply ignore the will of the people and do whatever Republicans want.

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.


How does it do that? if you got your way your vote would be the only vote that mattered and that rancher in WY would have no vote.


No. If I had my way, the majority of people in the country would decide the president and not a handful of Republicans. That was the whole point of fake electors and trying to stop the Senate confirmation on January 6. So they could throw the vote to the Republican controlled House to declare their king winner.

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.


This is another figment of your imagination. Remember to win the white house you need to carry purple states so this "extremist" argument of yours falls short as usual.


This is why Republicans are always playing victim and crying foul when their side loses and trying to find way to win when they lose. Republicans still believe millions of votes were cast fraudulently but have yet to prove that ever happened. Our elections are the most secure in the world, until January 6. Besides abolishing the Electoral College and replace it with the will of the people, we need civics classes ahead of every election. Not the spin of "if communist liberal Democrats win, patriots lose" Republican civics, but actual "here is how the Constitution works" civics.


Actually, it’s the Drmocrats trying to change the system in their favor—inefficient distribution of Democrat voters is their problem, not the Constitutional rules.
 
User avatar
NIKV69
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:54 pm

seb146 wrote:
No. If I had my way, the majority of people in the country would decide the president and not a handful of Republicans.


Your statement makes no sense. The deciding votes are not republicans they are independents. Trump won with people that voted for Obama the election before. I have said in the past you don't understand the electorate. You can't accept that fringe doesn't elect anything. It's the swing votes. The sooner you snap out of this identity politics craziness the better the discussion will be.
 
Newark727
Posts: 3136
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:55 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
inefficient distribution of Democrat voters is their problem, not the Constitutional rules.


Republicans apparently don't actually believe this, or we wouldn't be seeing dozens and dozens of efforts to change the voting rules and purge the rolls of Republican-unfriendly (or perceived as such) voters in Republican-run states. Why are they so afraid of voter turnout? Certainly not fraud - there's never more than a few cases of it every election, and every time it turns out most of those are actually Republicans.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 16040
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 1:15 am

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
No. If I had my way, the majority of people in the country would decide the president and not a handful of Republicans.


Your statement makes no sense. The deciding votes are not republicans they are independents. Trump won with people that voted for Obama the election before. I have said in the past you don't understand the electorate. You can't accept that fringe doesn't elect anything. It's the swing votes. The sooner you snap out of this identity politics craziness the better the discussion will be.


:checkmark:

Well-said. Then again, someone who starts out a discussion about electoral counts and representation for small states with "screw the states" isn't likely to be someone you can have a reasonable discussion with:

seb146 wrote:
victrola wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
[quote="bhill" The popular vote works in ever other Democracy on the planet...but not in the US?
..


Not sure about all these other democracies you are talking about but the US needs the electoral college or small states would never have a voice in the general. Which is why it's place and not going anywhere


Screw the states.


Yeah, that'll get you far in a discussion...
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 16040
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 1:21 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Actually, it’s the Drmocrats trying to change the system in their favor—inefficient distribution of Democrat voters is their problem, not the Constitutional rules.


Absolutely true. It's akin to asking for the winner of the World Series or the NBA Finals to be decided not on the number of games won, but the total number of points scored across a seven-game series.

But that's how Democrats work - when elections don't go their way, they want to change the rules instead of coming up with better ideas to entice more independent voters to see things their way.
 
Newark727
Posts: 3136
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 1:39 am

EA CO AS wrote:
But that's how Democrats work - when elections don't go their way, they want to change the rules instead of coming up with better ideas to entice more independent voters to see things their way.


This is pretty rich, given the zany schemes Republicans got up to when 2020 didn't break their way.

EA CO AS wrote:
Well-said. Then again, someone who starts out a discussion about electoral counts and representation for small states with "screw the states" isn't likely to be someone you can have a reasonable discussion with:


The question is this: what are the states for? It's been asked upthread but I'd like to emphasize it because it's really what the crux of the matter is. You and GalaxyFlyer see the states as more effectively expressing the public good than the federal government - or at least, you see the system that assumes such as being more desirable. Myself and seb146 see, if not exactly the opposite, then at least a lot of cases where the states stand between the public, and their rights as laid out in the Constitution. We don't want to give more political or electoral power to the state governments that created and enforced, for example, Jim Crow, and had to be coerced by the federal government via national legislation to letting all their inhabitants vote.
 
QF7
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 2:10 am

EA CO AS wrote:
But that's how Democrats work - when elections don't go their way, they want to change the rules instead of coming up with better ideas to entice more independent voters to see things their way.

To be fair, that goes both ways. Consider for example that Latinos as a whole are more likely Catholic and probably tend toward conservatism. So if Republicans would adopt a more reasonable approach toward immigration they would almost surely get a larger share of the Latino vote. Similarly with Black voters. Many are dedicated members of Baptist congregations and hold basic conservative views on family, work ethic, etc. So if Republicans would stop being such idiots about voter disenfranchisement in Black communities they would probably gain more Black votes.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14424
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 6:44 am

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Democracy should be about people.


You mean just the people in California and NY right?

seb146 wrote:
You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.


How does it do that? if you got your way your vote would be the only vote that mattered and that rancher in WY would have no vote.

seb146 wrote:
But then I forgot. According to white rural America, the multi-racial elitist people in the urban areas are not real Americans.


This is another figment of your imagination. Remember to win the white house you need to carry purple states so this "extremist" argument of yours falls short as usual.


So in your opinion people who live in bigger states don’t deserve the same voting rights as someone in a small state? How about making the EC proportional, then everyone’s vote counts equally, but you won’t agree with that because you know that’s the end of your party. They can’t win a popular vote, the popular vote should be the only vote that counts.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24955
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:22 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
No. If I had my way, the majority of people in the country would decide the president and not a handful of Republicans.


Your statement makes no sense. The deciding votes are not republicans they are independents. Trump won with people that voted for Obama the election before. I have said in the past you don't understand the electorate. You can't accept that fringe doesn't elect anything. It's the swing votes. The sooner you snap out of this identity politics craziness the better the discussion will be.


You are talking about one election six years ago. Since then, Republican controlled states have been moving to restrict voter access.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ ... tober-2021
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/08/politics ... index.html

This is the main stream of the Republican party, not the fringe. The sooner you "moderate" Republicans get that and do something, the better our country will be.
 
victrola
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:38 pm

 
TangoandCash
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:52 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:38 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Actually, it’s the Drmocrats trying to change the system in their favor—inefficient distribution of Democrat voters is their problem, not the Constitutional rules.



Yes, get enough California Democrats to move to Wyoming where they can take advantage of the Electoral College giving Wyoming disproportional power. :)
 
victrola
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:44 pm

Maybe states like California should split into several states the size of Wyoming. Let's see, 40 million Californians split into states with the population of Wyoming would make 66 states and give California 132 Senators.
 
User avatar
JBo
Posts: 1944
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 7:23 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 7:49 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Democracy should be about people.


You mean just the people in California and NY right


One person = one vote.

A vote from someone in rural Nebraska should count equally as a vote from someone in heavily urbanized New York City.

The fact that places like New York and California are more heavily populated shouldn't matter.

The idea that each state, as an entity, should have an equal voice in federal elections regardless of population is incredibly outdated.
 
victrola
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Sun Jul 24, 2022 8:06 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Actually, it’s the Drmocrats trying to change the system in their favor—inefficient distribution of Democrat voters is their problem, not the Constitutional rules.


Absolutely true. It's akin to asking for the winner of the World Series or the NBA Finals to be decided not on the number of games won, but the total number of points scored across a seven-game series.

But that's how Democrats work - when elections don't go their way, they want to change the rules instead of coming up with better ideas to entice more independent voters to see things their way.


It's an election not a sporting event. Your comment about the Democrats is hilarious given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote in the Presidency only once in the last 30 years. Let's face it, Republicans can't win in a democratic 1 person one vote system. So they need nonsense like the electoral college to perpetuate minority rule. Anything less than majority rule is not democratic.

Meanwhile we are witnessing what the Republicans do when an election doesn't go their way. I'm sure you are aware of the January 6 hearings. You Republicans just hate free and fair elections,
 
FGITD
Posts: 2184
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:12 am

victrola wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

It's an election not a sporting event. Your comment about the Democrats is hilarious given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote in the Presidency only once in the last 30 years. Let's face it, Republicans can't win in a democratic 1 person one vote system. So they need nonsense like the electoral college to perpetuate minority rule. Anything less than majority rule is not democratic.


The sporting event analogy is a bit funny. Basically saying that the team or person who wins the most is the overall winner. Not whoever scores the most via some convoluted scoring method.

Isn’t that pretty accurately describing that the popular vote winner should win the election?
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 16040
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:44 am

FGITD wrote:
victrola wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

It's an election not a sporting event. Your comment about the Democrats is hilarious given that the Republicans have only won the popular vote in the Presidency only once in the last 30 years. Let's face it, Republicans can't win in a democratic 1 person one vote system. So they need nonsense like the electoral college to perpetuate minority rule. Anything less than majority rule is not democratic.


The sporting event analogy is a bit funny. Basically saying that the team or person who wins the most is the overall winner. Not whoever scores the most via some convoluted scoring method.

Isn’t that pretty accurately describing that the popular vote winner should win the election?



Wow, did you miss the point or what? No, the World Series or NBA finals are based on the number of games won in the series, regardless of how many total runs/points are scored over the whole series. A popular vote only would allow Democrats to run up the tally in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, and other heavy liberal enclaves without bothering to appeal to voters in less populous but no less important areas of the nation.
 
alfa164
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:16 am

NIKV69 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
You just like the electoral college because it gives your extremist right wing minority the ability to dictate extremist policies to the rest of the people in this country. The electoral college and Senate should be abolished. My vote, no matter where I live in the United States should count just as much as some rancher's vote in Wyoming. However, it doesn't.

How does it do that? if you got your way your vote would be the only vote that mattered and that rancher in WY would have no vote.


That may be the silliest thing written here so far - and there have been a lot. Your "rancher in WY" definitely would have a vote - the same vote as everyone else in the USA. He just wouldn't have an outside-influence over his fellow citizens. Remember" one man, one vote?" Some people seem to want to ignore that principle.


EA CO AS wrote:
A popular vote only would allow Democrats to run up the tally in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, and other heavy liberal enclaves without bothering to appeal to voters in less populous but no less important areas of the nation.


... and the current system does just the opposite: it allows the minority party to "run up the tally" in sparsely-populated states, without bothering to appeal to voters who make up the majority of the USA.

What makes it "fair" for a voter in Wyoming, for example, to have more than three times the influence of a voter in California? Just because you don't like how a majority of citizens in California vote doesn't mean you can justify the diminution of their influence - and their importance as a voter.
Last edited by alfa164 on Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:21 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
Newark727
Posts: 3136
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:16 am

EA CO AS wrote:
Wow, did you miss the point or what? No, the World Series or NBA finals are based on the number of games won in the series, regardless of how many total runs/points are scored over the whole series. A popular vote only would allow Democrats to run up the tally in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, and other heavy liberal enclaves without bothering to appeal to voters in less populous but no less important areas of the nation.


Who's going around deciding which areas of the country are "more important?" Nobody. Their "importance" was decided by things like Roger Williams getting kicked out of Massachusetts in 1636 and politicians in 1820 trying to maintain a balance of power between free and slave states.
 
Kent350787
Posts: 2574
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: Electoral Count Act Reform

Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:18 am

EA CO AS wrote:
FGITD wrote:
victrola wrote:


The sporting event analogy is a bit funny. Basically saying that the team or person who wins the most is the overall winner. Not whoever scores the most via some convoluted scoring method.

Isn’t that pretty accurately describing that the popular vote winner should win the election?



Wow, did you miss the point or what? No, the World Series or NBA finals are based on the number of games won in the series, regardless of how many total runs/points are scored over the whole series. A popular vote only would allow Democrats to run up the tally in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, and other heavy liberal enclaves without bothering to appeal to voters in less populous but no less important areas of the nation.


The Senate is already the States' house, where voters in smaller states get an amplified say over legislation.

There is no good reasons to undemocratically amplify their Presidiential votes as well via the EC.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alex0easy, fortytwoeyes, Natflyer and 16 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos