|
WFA Action Alert |
Please Forward to Friends and Family
We just received notice of a bill, Assembly Bill 751, that would create a national popular vote for the U.S. presidency, essentially undermining the Electoral College. The bill was introduced late yesterday and the Assembly Elections Committee scheduled a public hearing for tomorrow at 1 p.m. The legislature is pushing this dangerous bill through at breakneck speed. AB 751 is part of a national effort to disenfranchise voters that is gaining ground at an alarming rate (with a troubling connection to the notorious liberal money-bags, George Soros). >>click here to scroll down to see what you can do.
Note: If you have Microsoft Outlook and you're having troubling accessing the links in this email, click on the yellow bar at the top of your email that says "Click here to turn on links."
Brief Explanation
The Electoral College, an election process created by the Founding Fathers and established in the U.S. Constitution, was a brilliant compromise between states with large populations and those with small populations. Each state is awarded a number of electoral votes for president based on state population and state sovereignty. The state popular vote for president determines which presidential candidates wins that state's electoral votes.
This bill would authorize the State of Wisconsin to take part in an interstate compact with other states, pledging that our state's electoral votes will go to the presidential candidate who wins, not the popular vote of Wisconsin, but the national popular vote. If you think your vote is just one of many in the state right now, imagine what little impact your vote would have if it was only one of millions and millions of votes! With the Electoral College, your vote is a higher percentage of the total votes from the state and has a greater impact on the presidential election. With a national popular vote, the states with the highest populations determine the president, and then Wisconsin is forced to ratify their vote, regardless of whether that candidate was the choice of the majority of Wisconsin voters.
What You Can Do to Protect the Efficacy of Your Vote - Sign our petition urging State Legislators to kill this bill. WFA will testify against this bill tomorrow at 1 p.m. It is extremely important that you sign this petition (and forward it to friends and family) so that we can take the signatures to committee and present them as part of our testimony. If possible, please sign the petition before 12 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, February 17. If you read this email after 1 p.m., please sign the petition! The Democrats are pushing this through at lightning speed and we need to show them how the public feels about AB 751. >> click here to sign the petition
- Contact the members of the Assembly Elections Committee. They need to hear from you on this bill! Please call or email the eight members of the committee. >>click here to send an email to the committee members (Note: if you see a "+" sign in front of the email addresses in your "Send to" box, remove the plus sign before sending the message.) >>click here for phone numbers to call committee members.
- Contact your State Representative and let them know you are opposed to AB 751. >> click here to send a prepared email, that you can edit as you like, to your State Representative
- Attend the hearing tomorrow at 1 p.m.! If you've never attended a public hearing before, this is the time to do it. The hearing begins at 1 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday February 17 in the North Hearing Room (2nd floor of the State Capitol). Even if you do not give testimony, you can register against the bill.
It is very clear that the Democratic Majority in the State Legislature is going to attempt to push this bill through before the end of the current legislative session in April. We need your help to fight the progress of AB 751 and the disenfranchising impact it would have on Wisconsin presidential votes.
For Families,
Julaine Appling, President
Wisconsin Family Action
www.wifamilyaction.org
866-849-2536
You have received this message because you have subscribed to a mailing list of Wisconsin Family Council. If you do not wish to receive periodic emails from this source, please click below to unsubscribe. |
|
|
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_%28United_States%29
Arguments in favor of the Electoral College
(
fast outline, detail follows the outline)
--------------------
Prevents an urban-centric victory
Prevents a candidate from winning the Presidency by simply winning in heavily populated urban areas.
Maintains the federal character of the nation
Forces candidates to pay attention to lightly populated states and their rules and reinforces the role of the state in federalism.
Enhances status of minority groups
Candidates must court a wide variety of people including minorities and interest groups.
Encourages stability through the two-party system
(Politicians must "...moderate their views to win broad, long-term support from across the entire nation.")
Death, Legally Defined Disability To Execute the Office or Legal Disqualification From Office of a candidate
(What happens when a Presidential / Vice Presidential Candidate dies shortly before the election.)
Isolation of election problems
(problems are limited to the state where it occurs.)
Encapsulation of election system
Each state chooses its methods (i.e. voting system, vote-recording technology) without affecting other states.
Neutralizes turnout disparities between states
Factors that affect the turnout (extreme Weather, hotly contested races, etc) are neutralized
Maintains separation of powers
(Read Full Paragraph below for detailed explanation)
----------------------
-----------------------
Detailed Version:
Arguments in favor of the Electoral College (From Wikipedia)
Prevents an urban-centric victory
Proponents of the Electoral College claim the Electoral College prevents a candidate from winning the Presidency by simply winning in heavily populated
urban areas. This means that candidates must make a much wider appeal than they would if they simply had to win the national popular vote.
[56]
Maintains the federal character of the nation
The United States of America is a federal coalition which consists of component states. Proponents of the current system argue that the collective opinion of even a small state merits attention at the federal level greater than that given to a small, though numerically-equivalent, portion of a very populous state. The system also allows each state the freedom, within constitutional bounds, to design its own laws on voting and enfranchisement without an undue incentive to maximize the number of votes cast.
For many years early in the nation's history, up until the
Jacksonian Era, many states appointed their electors by a vote of the
state legislature, and proponents argue that, in the end, the election of the President must still come down to the decisions of each state, or the federal nature of the United States will give way to a single massive, centralized government.
[57]
In his book
A More Perfect Constitution, Professor
Larry Sabato elaborated on this advantage of the Electoral College, arguing to "mend it, don't end it," in part because of its usefulness in forcing candidates to pay attention to lightly populated states and reinforcing the role of the state in federalism.
[58]
Enhances status of minority groups
Far from decreasing the power of
minority groups by depressing voter turnout, proponents argue that, by making the votes of a given state an all-or-nothing affair, minority groups can provide the critical edge that allows a candidate to win. This encourages candidates to court a wide variety of such minorities and
interest groups.
[57]
Encourages stability through the two-party system
Many proponents of the Electoral College see its negative effect on
third parties as a good thing. They argue that the two party system has provided stability through its ability to change during times of rapid political and cultural change. They believe it protects the most powerful office in the country from control by what these proponents view as regional minorities until they can moderate their views to win broad, long-term support from across the entire nation.
Death, Legally Defined Disability To Execute the Office or Legal Disqualification From Office of a candidate
The Constitution grants each state the right to appoint electors in a manner chosen by that state. While it is common to think of the electoral votes impersonally, as mere numbers, the Electoral College is in fact made up of real people (usually party regulars of the party whose candidate wins each state) with the capacity to adapt to unusual situations. That capacity might be particularly important if, for example, a candidate were to die or become in some other way legally disabled or disqualified to serve as President or Vice President. Advocates of the current system argue that these electors could then choose a suitable replacement (who would most likely come from the same party of the candidate who won the election) more competently than could the general voting public. Furthermore, the time period during which such a death or the onset of such a legal disability or disqualification might call for such an adaptation extends, under the Electoral College system, from before Election Day (many states cannot change ballots at a late stage) until the day the electors vote (the first Monday after the second Wednesday of December). Thus, until the electors cast their votes, it is not a federal issue, per se, but a state's rights issue and state laws (should) regulate the situation. In Virginia, for instance, the law clearly states that the electors must vote for the name of the candidate whom they represent on the ballot, and therefore these electors are not able to adapt to unusual situations, unless they are willing to violate the law, and suffer the penalties for so doing.
In the
election of 1872,
Democratic candidate
Horace Greeley did in fact die before the meeting of the Electoral College, resulting in Democratic disarray; the electors who were to have voted for Greeley split their votes across several candidates, including three votes cast for the deceased Greeley. However, President
Ulysses S. Grant, the
Republican incumbent, had already won an absolute majority of electors. Because it was the death of a losing candidate, there was no pressure to agree on a replacement candidate. There has never been a case of a candidate of the winning party dying.
In the
election of 1912, after the Republicans had renominated
President Taft and
Vice President Sherman, Sherman died shortly before the election, too late to change the names on the ballot, thus causing Sherman to be listed posthumously. That ticket finished third behind the Democrats (
Woodrow Wilson) and the Progressives (
Theodore Roosevelt), and the 8 electoral votes that Sherman would have received were cast for
Nicholas Murray Butler.
Isolation of election problems
Some supporters of the Electoral College note that it isolates the impact of any election fraud, or other such problems, to the state where it occurs. It prevents instances where a party dominant in one state may dishonestly inflate the votes for a candidate and thereby affect the election outcome. For instance, recounts occur only on a state-by-state basis, not nationwide.
[59]
Encapsulation of election system
The Electoral College allows for each state to conduct elections using whatever methods it chooses (i.e.
voting system,
vote-recording technology) without affecting other states. A national popular vote, by definition, requires all states to use plurality voting and would likely lead to national election rules and standards.
Neutralizes turnout disparities between states
There are factors that affect the turnout around the country. Weather can vary greatly across a large nation, rain or winter storms can impact voter participation in affected states. In addition, when a state has another high profile contest, such as a hotly contested Senate or gubernatorial race, turnout in that state can be affected. Because the allocation of electoral votes is independent of each state's turnout, the Electoral College neutralizes the effect of all such turnout disparities between states.
Maintains separation of powers
The Constitution separated government into three branches that check each other to minimize threats to liberty and encourage deliberation of governmental acts. Under the original framework, only members of the House of Representatives were directly elected by the people, with members of the Senate chosen by state legislatures, the President by the Electoral College, and the judiciary by the President and the Senate. The President was not directly elected in part due to fears that he could assert a national popular mandate that would undermine the legitimacy of the other branches, and potentially result in tyranny.
Wikipedia content is property of Wikipedia. Wisconsin Family Action content is property of Wisconsin Family Action.
Thank you for your time.
Republican Party of Pepin County
