Maryland Decides to suspend the Electoral College in favor of Majority Vote. Good or Bad?

Question

Maryland is poised to become the first state to approve giving its electoral votes for president to the winner of the national popular vote, rather than to the candidate chosen by state voters.
The plan, passed Monday by the state House, would take effect only if states representing a majority of the nation's 538 electoral votes adopted the same change.

Some states are considering the move as a way to avoid a scenario in which a candidate wins the national popular vote but loses in the Electoral College, as Democrat Al Gore lost to George W. Bush in 2000.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070402/ap_on_re_us/electoral_college_maryland

koalatcomics - Who's whining? Sounds more like you are.A little defensive aren't we? Guilty concience, sounds like to me. I just referenced a news story and asked for opinions. I don't live in Maryland and had nothing to do with this proposal.

Answer 1

The US constitution (article II, sect I, clause 2) allows each state to render its own means for selecting electors, so Maryland is technically allowed to appoint its electors based on this reasoning.

However, I can't see how the people of Maryland could knowingly support a bill that would dilute their presidential vote into the national pool instead of directly inducing their own representative electors.

The only imposition by the US constitution might be the 24th amendment, which basically says that the right of citizens to vote for electors for president can't be denied.

Answer 2

Neither good nor bad.

Utterly irrelevant politcal theater.

First you yourself admit that "The plan, passed Monday by the state House, would take effect only if states representing a majority of the nation's 538 electoral votes adopted the same change." Which is not going to happen.

Second, even if that were to happen it would probably get overturned in court. The State of Maryland is effectively disenfranchising its voters. Were a Republican to win the popular vote, Marland's electors would be required to vote for him, even though Maryland is a strongly Democratic state. Al Gore could win Maryand, but the Electors would still have to vote for Bush, if Bush won the popular vote. Maryand is telling it's voters that they don't matter, they should shut up and let California, New York, Florida, and Texas do their voting for them. That wouldn't pass muster with ANY judge.

So it is poorly thought out, utterly irrelevant, political theater.

Which sadly enough is pretty much all the Democrats are capable of these days.

Answer 3

that's unconstitutional and yet another mindless liberal thought. The electoral college isn't out of date. and is one in all the universal aspects that makes us a republic somewhat than a democracy. some human beings think of we live in a democracy here yet for me as quickly as I say the pledge of allegiance, I pledge allegiance to flag of the united states and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands. the actuality that we are a republic is cautioned in the form. the U. S. shape does not prescribe a wide-unfold vote for president. It demands that each state deliver the proper type of electors to the electoral college to pass with a president for the union. that's as much as each state to come returned to a determination how those electors are chosen. the tactic is in the state shape. the classic vote on your state (which is composed of your vote) determines the electors that are despatched to the electoral college. the rationalization in the back of it fairly is that the president represents the states and the union, not the folk. everybody is represented in the abode of Representatives and the Senate. The President serves as chief govt officer of the union and commander in chief of the militia in offering for the fear-unfastened protection of the union. What in no way counts in the presidential election is the nationwide conventional vote. That way the president is elected via the states not the folk. The nationwide conventional vote lumps all voters collectively. Electing a president that way might continually have some heavily populated cities figuring out on the president, not the states. some human beings argue that the electoral college is in place because of the fact we did not have the communique then that we've at present. it fairly is preposterous. the advice might nevertheless would desire to be carried on horseback and can get there no quicker and it could have been carried on one horse for each state. it fairly is only yet another unpatriotic loony thought.

Answer 4

Bad.

Lets say Maryland has 4 million people. 2 million of them vote for one candidate, 2 million of them vote for the other. It's as if NO ONE in the state of Maryland actually voted. How is the elected official supposed to know which half of Maryland he's to represent?

Where as if 2,000,0001 vote for one candidate and 1,999,999 vote for the other, the Majority of the state casts the ballot for the entire state and Maryland actually has a say in what happens.

The electoral college actually represents your states interests better than a popular vote would. People have a hard time understanding that though.

Answer 5

I think it would be the best thing that ever happened to America. The Electoral Vote is not fair. Let the best man win by popular vote, if it had of been in force 2000 we wouldn't had Dubya ruining America

Answer 6

So, basically, they're disenfranchising their own citizens if they don't vote "correctly"? How absurd and undemocratic!

I'm truly shocked at the idiotic acts that Bush Derangement Syndrome has driven the left to perpetrate.

Such silliness from government should not be countenanced.

Answer 7

GOD YOUR STILL WHINING ABOUT IT SEVEN YEARS LATER...GEEZ...

understand why the electoral college is here. it so people like the miami dade liberals who can figure out what side of the ballot to punch cant affect a national election...it eliminates the infamous liberal ...do over and provides a safeguard from people like al gore attempting to stack a deck and rig an election..its worked for over two hundred years...it worked in two thousand.
YOU LOST
GROW UP
GET OVER IT
MOVE ON.

Answer 8

That would require a Constitutional Amendment. They take time. Don't expect to see it any time soon.

Answer 9

I guess they don't use The Constitution in Maryland.Plenty of pandering politicians though.

Answer 10

Maryland should find better things to do with it's spare time and tax money.