The Popular Vote for President Petition
Sign Now
Do you think that New York should follow the recent common-sense examples of New Jersey and Maryland and enter into a compact to elect the president by national popular vote-- eliminating the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea-- by passing A.3883, bipartisan legislation co-sponsored by Assemblymembers Jeffrey Dinowitz, Sandy Galef, Fred Thiele, Charles Lavine, and Barbara Lifton?
See a bit below the strong Daily Freeman editorial for this January 19th-- as well as a strong editorial from the New York Times on this; also see NationalPopularVote.com.
If you agree, sign on to this petition, pass it along to all you know, call the Governor and state legislature at (877) 255-9417, and send a letter to [email protected] asking for the Dutchess County Legislature to pass the resolution below submitted by yours truly January 19th.
Joel Tyner
County Legislator
Clinton/Rhinebeck
324 Browns Pond Road
Staatsburg, NY 12580
[email protected]
(845) 876-2488
p.s. For more information see:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-13-NewJersey_N.htm ;
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/13/politics/main3706884.shtml ;
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3457/dropping_out_of_ele ;
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03883 ;
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19206262&BRD=1769&PAG=461&dept_id=82701&rfi=6 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WHEREAS, in 1960, 24 states, with 327 electoral votes, were battleground states, according to estimates by National Popular Vote, a bipartisan coalition in support of this reform; in 2004, only 13 states, representing a mere 159 of the total 538 electoral votes, were considered "in play" in the 2004 presidential election, according to FairVote; that is, the election was contested in and decided by those states and their voters, and
WHEREAS, in the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, the winners were selected based upon the outcomes of elections in one state or less because of their weight in the Electoral College; the "winner take all" system is no longer adequate, and the voice of millions of Americans should not be concentrated into the outcome of one state's Election, and
WHEREAS, the Electoral College discourages turnout because voters in two-thirds of the nation know well before Election Day who will win their states; it also discriminates among voters by weighing presidential votes unequally; a Wyoming voter has about four times as much impact on selecting that state's electors as a California voter does on selecting that state's, and
WHEREAS, there is a solution that would not require a constitutional amendment; it proposes that states commit to casting their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote; these promises would become binding only when states representing a majority of the Electoral College signed on; then any candidate who won the popular vote would be sure to win the White House, and
WHEREAS, the Electoral College is a 18th Century anachronism that no longer serves the goals of a pure democracy; the enactment of an interstate compact to insure the popular election of the President is a creative and innovative way to attain this goal; New York State, the Empire State should take a leadership role in energizing our democracy, and
WHEREAS, Article II of the United States Constitution explicitly outlines the manner in which the President and Vice President are elected saying that, "Each State shall appoint, in such a manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole numbers of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled to in the Congress," and
WHEREAS, an interstate agreement would send a clear message to Presidential candidates that no citizens` vote can be expected based upon party affiliation alone; an office that is representing all 50 states should be filled by a candidate who campaigned in all 50 states to gain the knowledge and support of all citizens, this would guarantee the presidency to the person who received the most votes, and ensure that all states are competitive in presidential elections, making all votes important, and
WHEREAS, a federal constitutional amendment (requiring two-thirds of Congress and 38 states) is not required to change the state laws that currently specify use of the winner-take-all rule; nationwide popular election of the President can be implemented if the states join together to pass identical state laws awarding all of their electoral votes to the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia; the proposed state legislation would come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical form, by enough states to elect a President-that is, by states
possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes, and
WHEREAS, New Jersey in January became the second state to enter a compact that would eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea; Gov. Jon S. Corzine signed legislation that approves delivering the state's 15 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote; the Assembly approved the bill in December and the Senate followed suit earlier in January, and
WHEREAS, Maryland, with 10 electoral votes, has also passed a similar compact into law; the compact has also passed both houses of the Illinois Legislature, according to National Popular Vote, and has been approved by one legislative house in Arkansas, Colorado and North Carolina; state legislatures in California and Hawaii have also passed bills to join the compact; the object is for states to agree to award their electoral votes together in an effort to reflect the will of the majority of voters who participated in the election, and
WHEREAS, throughout the nation's history, there have been a series of reforms affecting how elections are conducted, like the ones that gave blacks and women the vote and provided for the direct election of United States senators; sidestepping the Electoral College would be in this worthy tradition of making American democracy more democratic, and therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Dutchess County Legislature requests that the New York State Legislature pass and the Governor sign into law A.3883, legislation that would enter New York into a compact to elect the president by national popular vote and eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea, co-sponsored by Assemblymembers Jeffrey Dinowitz, Sandy Galef, Fred Thiele, Charles Lavine, and Barbara Lifton, and be it further
RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be sent to Governor Eliot Spitzer, State Senator Vincent Leibell, State Senator Stephen Saland, and Assemblymembers Greg Ball, Kevin Cahill, Thomas Kirwan, Joel Miller, and Marcus Molinaro.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"N.J. Backs Popular Vote, Joins Md." by Emile Wamsteker [excerpt from USA Today 1/13/08]
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-13-NewJersey_N.htm
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) New Jersey on Sunday became the second state to enter a compact that would eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine signed legislation that approves delivering the state's 15 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. The Assembly approved the bill last month and the Senate followed suit earlier this month.
Maryland with 10 electoral votes had been the only state to pass the compact into law.
The measure could result in the electoral votes going to a candidate opposed by voters in New Jersey, which has backed Democratic presidential candidates since 1988.
The compact would take effect only if enough states those with a majority of votes in the Electoral College agreed to it. A candidate needs 270 of 538 electoral votes to win.
The compact has also passed both houses of the Illinois Legislature, according to the National Popular Vote movement, and has been approved by one legislative house in Arkansas, Colorado and North Carolina.
Governors in California and Hawaii, though, vetoed bills to join the compact.
The goal is to ensure that the national popular vote winner becomes president. Democrats who sponsored the bill have noted that their party's 2000 presidential nominee, Al Gore, won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College.
Sponsors contend the agreement would ensure that all states are competitive in presidential elections and make all votes important. It also would guarantee the presidency to the person who received the most votes...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily Freeman editorial Jan. 19th: "The Popular Vote"
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19206262&BRD=1769&PAG=461&dept_id=82701&rfi=6
There is an innovative movement afoot to make the election of the president of the United States a popular affair.
As in, whoever gets the most votes wins.
What a radical concept!
Supporters are urging states to commit to a compact by which each state would agree to direct their Electoral College voters to cast their presidential votes for who won the overall national popular vote, not necessarily for who won the state contest.
The interstate compact would take effect as soon as enough states to constitute a majority of votes in the Electoral College have joined.
New Jersey this month joined Maryland as the only states to commit to the idea, but at least one legislative chamber in six other states have passed similar legislation and bills have been introduced in numerous other state legislatures across the nation.
Such a bill has been introduced the past couple of years in the New York state Assembly, but with no companion bill in the state Senate, making it an effective dead letter.
It is hard to argue with the basic premise of the initiative. All American elections, including the presidency, ought to be decided by who gets the most votes, not by an arcane system of state-by-state votes.
Supporters of the initiative say making every vote count would make all states a competitive battleground for the presidency and, therefore, part of the great national discussion of issues.
Opponents say it is an end-run around the Constitution.
That's too bad. For one thing, it's not really an end-run around the Constitution, since the Founding Fathers pretty much left it to the states to decide the mechanism for delivering their electoral votes.
For another, the opposition disparages a creative, yet sincere, effort to deliver what one political scientist characterizes as "a system that reflects public preferences."
In truth, the initiative recognizes the basic unfairness of the current system, which effectively writes a huge number of states - and, therefore, voters - out of what should be a great national contest.
According to FairVote, a voting rights organization, only 13 states, representing a mere 159 of the total 538 electoral votes, were considered "in play" in the 2004 presidential election. That is, the election was contested in and decided by those states and their voters.
The rest, effectively, be damned.
And you can be assured that New York is one of the damned. If the Empire State isn't safely in the pocket of the Democratic presidential candidate, he or she doesn't have a chance of winning. That's unfair to all New York voters who want their votes to count, but especially to those who do not vote for the Democratic candidate. Why shouldn't their vote count as much as any American's?
Opponents of the initiative are in the strange position of standing on what they wrongly perceive to be principle in the service of an archaic, unpopular - truly, undemocratic - system.
Failing a constitutional amendment to mandate the race be decided by popular vote, this is an initiative that deserves the support of New York.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
New York Times editorial Mar. 14, 2006: "Drop Out of the College"
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/editorials/newyorktimes
The Electoral College is an antidemocratic relic. Everyone who remembers 2000 knows that it can lead to the election of the candidate who loses the popular vote as president. But the Electoral College's other serious flaws are perhaps even more debilitating for a democracy. It focuses presidential elections on just a handful of battleground states, and pushes the rest of the nation's voters to the sidelines.
There is an innovative new proposal for states to take the lead in undoing the Electoral College. Legislatures across the country should get behind it.
Both parties should have reason to fear the college's perverse effects. In 2000, the Democrats lost out. But in 2004, a shift of 60,000 votes in Ohio would have elected John Kerry, even though he lost the national popular vote decisively.
Just as serious is the way the Electoral College distorts presidential campaigns. Candidates have no incentive to campaign in, or address the concerns of, states that reliably vote for a particular party. In recent years, the battleground in presidential elections has shrunk drastically. In 1960, 24 states, with 327 electoral votes, were battleground states, according to estimates by National Popular Vote, the bipartisan coalition making the new proposal. In 2004, only 13 states, with 159 electoral votes, were. As a result, campaigns and national priorities are stacked in favor of a few strategic states. Ethanol fuel, a pet issue of Iowa farmers, is discussed a lot. But issues of equal concern to states like Alabama, California, New York and Indiana are not.
The Electoral College discourages turnout because voters in two-thirds of the nation know well before Election Day who will win their states. It also discriminates among voters by weighing presidential votes unequally. A Wyoming voter has about four times as much impact on selecting that state's electors as a California voter does on selecting that state's.
The answer to all of these problems is direct election of the president. Past attempts to abolish the Electoral College by amending the Constitution have run into difficulty. But National Popular Vote, which includes several former members of Congress, is offering an ingenious solution that would not require a constitutional amendment. It proposes that states commit to casting their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote. These promises would become binding only when states representing a majority of the Electoral College signed on. Then any candidate who won the popular vote would be sure to win the White House.
The coalition is starting out by trying to have laws passed in Illinois and a few other states. Americans are rightly cautious about tinkering with mechanisms established by the Constitution. But throughout the nation's history, there have been a series of reforms affecting how elections are conducted, like the ones that gave blacks and women the vote and provided for the direct election of United States senators. Sidestepping the Electoral College would be in this worthy tradition of making American democracy more democratic.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/states.php?s=NY ...
New York
ALBANY, February 12, 2007 - Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz and Fred W. Thiele, Jr. and Assemblywoman Sandy Galef have introduced the National Popular Vote bill for 2007 in New York (A3883) (Status of A3883).
In 2006, five Republican New York Assembly members introduced the bill (A11563) on May 25, 2006:
Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr. (Republican, Independence, Working Families Sag Harbor);
Assemblyman Jim Bacalles (Republican, Conservative Corning);
Assemblyman Joe Errigo (Republican, Conservative Conesus);
Assemblyman Andrew Raia (Republican, Conservative, Independence, working Families East Northport); and Assemblywoman Teresa Sayward (Republican, Independence, Conservative Willsboro).The bills sponsor, New York State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr. stated in 2006:
"The election of the President by popular vote is a goal that is supported by more than 70\% of the American people. There is no rational reason in the 21st Century why the public should not be permitted to select its President by majority vote. The Electoral College is a 18th Century anachronism that no longer serves the goals of a pure democracy. The enactment of an interstate compact to insure the popular election of the President is a creative and innovative way to attain this goal. New York State, the Empire State should take a leadership role in energizing our democracy."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03883 ...
A03883 Summary:
BILL NO A03883A
SAME AS No same as
SPONSOR Dinowitz
COSPNSR Thiele, Galef, Lavine, Lifton
MLTSPNSR
Add Art 12 Title IV SS12-400 & 12-402, El L
Enacts the agreement among the states to elect the president by national
popular vote; creates a compact between the states and the District of
Columbia; defines terms.
A03883 Actions:
BILL NO A03883A
01/29/2007 referred to election law
03/07/2007 amend and recommit to election law
03/07/2007 print number 3883a
A03883 Votes:
A03883 Memo:
BILL NUMBER:A3883A
TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the election law, in relation to
enacting the agreement among the states to elect the president by
national popular vote
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
To make an interstate agreement among member states to award their
electoral votes for president to the candidate that receives a
majority of the popular vote cast within all 50 states including the
District of Columbia, These participating states will award their
electoral votes together in an effort to reflect the will of the
majority of voters who participated in the election.
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
See Bill
JUSTIFICATION:
Article II of the United States Constitution explicitly outlines the
manner in which the President and Vice President are elected saying
that "Each State shall appoint, in such a manner as the Legislature
thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole numbers
of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled to
in the Congress..."
21st Century politics has created a system in which candidates are
provided with voting histories, demographic analysis, and scores of
other types of information that shapes how campaign time and money is
spent. Certain states may be deemed "Red", or historically in support
of Republican candidates or "Blue", meaning historically in support of
Democratic candidates. In addition, candidates for President have
spent a majority of their time campaigning in "battleground states"
that research has shown to be evenly divided and a potential victory
for either candidate, while depending on the votes from "Red" or
"Blue" states without working to earn them.
Also in the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, the winners were
selected based upon the outcomes of elections in one state or less
because of their weight in the Electoral College. The "winner take
all" system is no longer adequate, and the voice of millions of
Americans should not be concentrated into the outcome of one state`s
election.
This interstate agreement would send a clear message to Presidential
candidates that no citizens` vote can be expected based upon party
affiliation alone. An office that is representing all 50 states should
be filled by a candidate who campaigned in all 50 states to gain the
knowledge and support of all citizens.
A federal constitutional amendment (requiring two-thirds of Congress
and 38 states) is not required to change the state laws that currently
specify use of the winner-take-all rule. Nationwide popular election
of the President can be implemented if the states join together to
pass identical state laws awarding all of their electoral votes to the
presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50
states and the District of Columbia. The proposed state legislation
would come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical
form, by enough states to elect a President-that is, by states
possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes.
See a bit below the strong Daily Freeman editorial for this January 19th-- as well as a strong editorial from the New York Times on this; also see NationalPopularVote.com.
If you agree, sign on to this petition, pass it along to all you know, call the Governor and state legislature at (877) 255-9417, and send a letter to [email protected] asking for the Dutchess County Legislature to pass the resolution below submitted by yours truly January 19th.
Joel Tyner
County Legislator
Clinton/Rhinebeck
324 Browns Pond Road
Staatsburg, NY 12580
[email protected]
(845) 876-2488
p.s. For more information see:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-13-NewJersey_N.htm ;
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/13/politics/main3706884.shtml ;
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3457/dropping_out_of_ele ;
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03883 ;
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19206262&BRD=1769&PAG=461&dept_id=82701&rfi=6 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WHEREAS, in 1960, 24 states, with 327 electoral votes, were battleground states, according to estimates by National Popular Vote, a bipartisan coalition in support of this reform; in 2004, only 13 states, representing a mere 159 of the total 538 electoral votes, were considered "in play" in the 2004 presidential election, according to FairVote; that is, the election was contested in and decided by those states and their voters, and
WHEREAS, in the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, the winners were selected based upon the outcomes of elections in one state or less because of their weight in the Electoral College; the "winner take all" system is no longer adequate, and the voice of millions of Americans should not be concentrated into the outcome of one state's Election, and
WHEREAS, the Electoral College discourages turnout because voters in two-thirds of the nation know well before Election Day who will win their states; it also discriminates among voters by weighing presidential votes unequally; a Wyoming voter has about four times as much impact on selecting that state's electors as a California voter does on selecting that state's, and
WHEREAS, there is a solution that would not require a constitutional amendment; it proposes that states commit to casting their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote; these promises would become binding only when states representing a majority of the Electoral College signed on; then any candidate who won the popular vote would be sure to win the White House, and
WHEREAS, the Electoral College is a 18th Century anachronism that no longer serves the goals of a pure democracy; the enactment of an interstate compact to insure the popular election of the President is a creative and innovative way to attain this goal; New York State, the Empire State should take a leadership role in energizing our democracy, and
WHEREAS, Article II of the United States Constitution explicitly outlines the manner in which the President and Vice President are elected saying that, "Each State shall appoint, in such a manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole numbers of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled to in the Congress," and
WHEREAS, an interstate agreement would send a clear message to Presidential candidates that no citizens` vote can be expected based upon party affiliation alone; an office that is representing all 50 states should be filled by a candidate who campaigned in all 50 states to gain the knowledge and support of all citizens, this would guarantee the presidency to the person who received the most votes, and ensure that all states are competitive in presidential elections, making all votes important, and
WHEREAS, a federal constitutional amendment (requiring two-thirds of Congress and 38 states) is not required to change the state laws that currently specify use of the winner-take-all rule; nationwide popular election of the President can be implemented if the states join together to pass identical state laws awarding all of their electoral votes to the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia; the proposed state legislation would come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical form, by enough states to elect a President-that is, by states
possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes, and
WHEREAS, New Jersey in January became the second state to enter a compact that would eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea; Gov. Jon S. Corzine signed legislation that approves delivering the state's 15 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote; the Assembly approved the bill in December and the Senate followed suit earlier in January, and
WHEREAS, Maryland, with 10 electoral votes, has also passed a similar compact into law; the compact has also passed both houses of the Illinois Legislature, according to National Popular Vote, and has been approved by one legislative house in Arkansas, Colorado and North Carolina; state legislatures in California and Hawaii have also passed bills to join the compact; the object is for states to agree to award their electoral votes together in an effort to reflect the will of the majority of voters who participated in the election, and
WHEREAS, throughout the nation's history, there have been a series of reforms affecting how elections are conducted, like the ones that gave blacks and women the vote and provided for the direct election of United States senators; sidestepping the Electoral College would be in this worthy tradition of making American democracy more democratic, and therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Dutchess County Legislature requests that the New York State Legislature pass and the Governor sign into law A.3883, legislation that would enter New York into a compact to elect the president by national popular vote and eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea, co-sponsored by Assemblymembers Jeffrey Dinowitz, Sandy Galef, Fred Thiele, Charles Lavine, and Barbara Lifton, and be it further
RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be sent to Governor Eliot Spitzer, State Senator Vincent Leibell, State Senator Stephen Saland, and Assemblymembers Greg Ball, Kevin Cahill, Thomas Kirwan, Joel Miller, and Marcus Molinaro.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"N.J. Backs Popular Vote, Joins Md." by Emile Wamsteker [excerpt from USA Today 1/13/08]
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-13-NewJersey_N.htm
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) New Jersey on Sunday became the second state to enter a compact that would eliminate the Electoral College's power to choose a president if enough states endorse the idea.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine signed legislation that approves delivering the state's 15 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. The Assembly approved the bill last month and the Senate followed suit earlier this month.
Maryland with 10 electoral votes had been the only state to pass the compact into law.
The measure could result in the electoral votes going to a candidate opposed by voters in New Jersey, which has backed Democratic presidential candidates since 1988.
The compact would take effect only if enough states those with a majority of votes in the Electoral College agreed to it. A candidate needs 270 of 538 electoral votes to win.
The compact has also passed both houses of the Illinois Legislature, according to the National Popular Vote movement, and has been approved by one legislative house in Arkansas, Colorado and North Carolina.
Governors in California and Hawaii, though, vetoed bills to join the compact.
The goal is to ensure that the national popular vote winner becomes president. Democrats who sponsored the bill have noted that their party's 2000 presidential nominee, Al Gore, won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College.
Sponsors contend the agreement would ensure that all states are competitive in presidential elections and make all votes important. It also would guarantee the presidency to the person who received the most votes...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily Freeman editorial Jan. 19th: "The Popular Vote"
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19206262&BRD=1769&PAG=461&dept_id=82701&rfi=6
There is an innovative movement afoot to make the election of the president of the United States a popular affair.
As in, whoever gets the most votes wins.
What a radical concept!
Supporters are urging states to commit to a compact by which each state would agree to direct their Electoral College voters to cast their presidential votes for who won the overall national popular vote, not necessarily for who won the state contest.
The interstate compact would take effect as soon as enough states to constitute a majority of votes in the Electoral College have joined.
New Jersey this month joined Maryland as the only states to commit to the idea, but at least one legislative chamber in six other states have passed similar legislation and bills have been introduced in numerous other state legislatures across the nation.
Such a bill has been introduced the past couple of years in the New York state Assembly, but with no companion bill in the state Senate, making it an effective dead letter.
It is hard to argue with the basic premise of the initiative. All American elections, including the presidency, ought to be decided by who gets the most votes, not by an arcane system of state-by-state votes.
Supporters of the initiative say making every vote count would make all states a competitive battleground for the presidency and, therefore, part of the great national discussion of issues.
Opponents say it is an end-run around the Constitution.
That's too bad. For one thing, it's not really an end-run around the Constitution, since the Founding Fathers pretty much left it to the states to decide the mechanism for delivering their electoral votes.
For another, the opposition disparages a creative, yet sincere, effort to deliver what one political scientist characterizes as "a system that reflects public preferences."
In truth, the initiative recognizes the basic unfairness of the current system, which effectively writes a huge number of states - and, therefore, voters - out of what should be a great national contest.
According to FairVote, a voting rights organization, only 13 states, representing a mere 159 of the total 538 electoral votes, were considered "in play" in the 2004 presidential election. That is, the election was contested in and decided by those states and their voters.
The rest, effectively, be damned.
And you can be assured that New York is one of the damned. If the Empire State isn't safely in the pocket of the Democratic presidential candidate, he or she doesn't have a chance of winning. That's unfair to all New York voters who want their votes to count, but especially to those who do not vote for the Democratic candidate. Why shouldn't their vote count as much as any American's?
Opponents of the initiative are in the strange position of standing on what they wrongly perceive to be principle in the service of an archaic, unpopular - truly, undemocratic - system.
Failing a constitutional amendment to mandate the race be decided by popular vote, this is an initiative that deserves the support of New York.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
New York Times editorial Mar. 14, 2006: "Drop Out of the College"
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/editorials/newyorktimes
The Electoral College is an antidemocratic relic. Everyone who remembers 2000 knows that it can lead to the election of the candidate who loses the popular vote as president. But the Electoral College's other serious flaws are perhaps even more debilitating for a democracy. It focuses presidential elections on just a handful of battleground states, and pushes the rest of the nation's voters to the sidelines.
There is an innovative new proposal for states to take the lead in undoing the Electoral College. Legislatures across the country should get behind it.
Both parties should have reason to fear the college's perverse effects. In 2000, the Democrats lost out. But in 2004, a shift of 60,000 votes in Ohio would have elected John Kerry, even though he lost the national popular vote decisively.
Just as serious is the way the Electoral College distorts presidential campaigns. Candidates have no incentive to campaign in, or address the concerns of, states that reliably vote for a particular party. In recent years, the battleground in presidential elections has shrunk drastically. In 1960, 24 states, with 327 electoral votes, were battleground states, according to estimates by National Popular Vote, the bipartisan coalition making the new proposal. In 2004, only 13 states, with 159 electoral votes, were. As a result, campaigns and national priorities are stacked in favor of a few strategic states. Ethanol fuel, a pet issue of Iowa farmers, is discussed a lot. But issues of equal concern to states like Alabama, California, New York and Indiana are not.
The Electoral College discourages turnout because voters in two-thirds of the nation know well before Election Day who will win their states. It also discriminates among voters by weighing presidential votes unequally. A Wyoming voter has about four times as much impact on selecting that state's electors as a California voter does on selecting that state's.
The answer to all of these problems is direct election of the president. Past attempts to abolish the Electoral College by amending the Constitution have run into difficulty. But National Popular Vote, which includes several former members of Congress, is offering an ingenious solution that would not require a constitutional amendment. It proposes that states commit to casting their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote. These promises would become binding only when states representing a majority of the Electoral College signed on. Then any candidate who won the popular vote would be sure to win the White House.
The coalition is starting out by trying to have laws passed in Illinois and a few other states. Americans are rightly cautious about tinkering with mechanisms established by the Constitution. But throughout the nation's history, there have been a series of reforms affecting how elections are conducted, like the ones that gave blacks and women the vote and provided for the direct election of United States senators. Sidestepping the Electoral College would be in this worthy tradition of making American democracy more democratic.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/states.php?s=NY ...
New York
ALBANY, February 12, 2007 - Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz and Fred W. Thiele, Jr. and Assemblywoman Sandy Galef have introduced the National Popular Vote bill for 2007 in New York (A3883) (Status of A3883).
In 2006, five Republican New York Assembly members introduced the bill (A11563) on May 25, 2006:
Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr. (Republican, Independence, Working Families Sag Harbor);
Assemblyman Jim Bacalles (Republican, Conservative Corning);
Assemblyman Joe Errigo (Republican, Conservative Conesus);
Assemblyman Andrew Raia (Republican, Conservative, Independence, working Families East Northport); and Assemblywoman Teresa Sayward (Republican, Independence, Conservative Willsboro).The bills sponsor, New York State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr. stated in 2006:
"The election of the President by popular vote is a goal that is supported by more than 70\% of the American people. There is no rational reason in the 21st Century why the public should not be permitted to select its President by majority vote. The Electoral College is a 18th Century anachronism that no longer serves the goals of a pure democracy. The enactment of an interstate compact to insure the popular election of the President is a creative and innovative way to attain this goal. New York State, the Empire State should take a leadership role in energizing our democracy."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03883 ...
A03883 Summary:
BILL NO A03883A
SAME AS No same as
SPONSOR Dinowitz
COSPNSR Thiele, Galef, Lavine, Lifton
MLTSPNSR
Add Art 12 Title IV SS12-400 & 12-402, El L
Enacts the agreement among the states to elect the president by national
popular vote; creates a compact between the states and the District of
Columbia; defines terms.
A03883 Actions:
BILL NO A03883A
01/29/2007 referred to election law
03/07/2007 amend and recommit to election law
03/07/2007 print number 3883a
A03883 Votes:
A03883 Memo:
BILL NUMBER:A3883A
TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the election law, in relation to
enacting the agreement among the states to elect the president by
national popular vote
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
To make an interstate agreement among member states to award their
electoral votes for president to the candidate that receives a
majority of the popular vote cast within all 50 states including the
District of Columbia, These participating states will award their
electoral votes together in an effort to reflect the will of the
majority of voters who participated in the election.
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
See Bill
JUSTIFICATION:
Article II of the United States Constitution explicitly outlines the
manner in which the President and Vice President are elected saying
that "Each State shall appoint, in such a manner as the Legislature
thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole numbers
of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled to
in the Congress..."
21st Century politics has created a system in which candidates are
provided with voting histories, demographic analysis, and scores of
other types of information that shapes how campaign time and money is
spent. Certain states may be deemed "Red", or historically in support
of Republican candidates or "Blue", meaning historically in support of
Democratic candidates. In addition, candidates for President have
spent a majority of their time campaigning in "battleground states"
that research has shown to be evenly divided and a potential victory
for either candidate, while depending on the votes from "Red" or
"Blue" states without working to earn them.
Also in the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, the winners were
selected based upon the outcomes of elections in one state or less
because of their weight in the Electoral College. The "winner take
all" system is no longer adequate, and the voice of millions of
Americans should not be concentrated into the outcome of one state`s
election.
This interstate agreement would send a clear message to Presidential
candidates that no citizens` vote can be expected based upon party
affiliation alone. An office that is representing all 50 states should
be filled by a candidate who campaigned in all 50 states to gain the
knowledge and support of all citizens.
A federal constitutional amendment (requiring two-thirds of Congress
and 38 states) is not required to change the state laws that currently
specify use of the winner-take-all rule. Nationwide popular election
of the President can be implemented if the states join together to
pass identical state laws awarding all of their electoral votes to the
presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50
states and the District of Columbia. The proposed state legislation
would come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical
form, by enough states to elect a President-that is, by states
possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes.
Sign The Petition
Continue with Google
OR
If you already have an account please sign in, otherwise register an account for free then sign the petition filling the fields below.
Email and password will be your account data, you will be able to sign other petitions after logging in.
Shoutbox
Goal
0 signatures
Goal: 50
Tags
No tags
Embed Codes
direct link
link for html
link for forum without title
link for forum with title
