Daily Kos: A Plan to Elect the President by Popular Vote

[SuperWonk]

Saw this at Kos - it is the #1 diary.

A Plan to Elect the President by Popular Vote
by Birch Bayh
Thu Mar 02, 2006 at 11:29:28 AM PDT

I have long believed the President and Vice President should be chosen by the same method every other elective office in this country is filled--by citizen voters of the United States in a system which counts each vote equally. That is why I am proud to be part of a new coalition known as National Popular Vote pursuing a popular vote for the president through action in the states. During my tenure in the US Senate we held several hearings on this topic but were unable to pass the amendment.

Unfortunately, Congress has continued to block this basic reform that has long-standing, overwhelming public support. Gallup polls have shown strong public support for nationwide popular election of the President for over five decades. Numerous other polls have confirmed a high level of public support for this reform. Polls consistently show 60-80% of Americans believe they should be able to cast votes in the direct election of the President: Gallup Poll.

That is why I unequivocally support this new strategy to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President. This new approach is consistent with the Constitution and lets states push this reform without waiting for Congress to act.

Today more than ever, the system we use is a disservice to the voters. With the number of battleground states steadily shrinking, we see candidates and their campaigns focused on fewer and fewer states. While running for the nation's highest office, candidates in 2004 completely ignored three-quarters of the states, including California, Texas and New York, our three most populous states. Why should our national leaders be elected by only reaching out to 1/4 of our states? It seems inherently illogical, and it is.

In recent history, we all remember the 2000 election which awarded the Presidency to the candidate who came in second in the popular vote. That's water under the bridge. But there are few who realize in 2004 President Bush's 3.5 million vote lead over Senator Kerry could have been trumped with a change of less than 60,000 votes in Ohio. With Ohio in the Kerry column the current system and would have elected him President. But our proposal isn't about elections. It's about the future of our democracy.

In the final analysis, to me the most compelling reason for directly electing our president and vice president is one of principle. In the United States every vote must count equally. One person, one vote is more than a clever phrase, it's the cornerstone of justice and equality. We can and must see that our electoral system awards victory to the candidates chosen by the most voters.

It is heartening to see the Every Vote Equal strategy described in a new book Every Vote Equal will correct the flawed system we maintain for electing our top two leaders. States must band together to solve this long-standing, vexatious problem - I hope every state will take up legislation and move to join the agreement. Since Congress has repeatedly refused to act, it's refreshing to know states have the ability under the Constitution to step up and create the solution Americans have long supported. I hope you will join me in supporting this important effort.

Former Sen. Birch Bayh (D-Indiana)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/2/132928/7960

[9119495]

1. Bout phukin' time! It's my key issue.

It would be great if 2000 was prevented from happening again and this could only be good for Democrats--and not just in the short term. How soon are we likely to stop being an urban party in support of minorities? Not likely and those are places that will benefit from the popular vote argument.

[aquart]

2. Sounds good.

Actually makes the election even easier to steal. But hey....

[9119495]

4. An Electoral College makes it more easy to be stolen

For proof, add up all those deep red states out west until you get to about 55 Electoral Votes. Then compare that figure with CA...What do we find? More votes in CA. CA may go back and forth but those Westy states are never going blue and they get more bang for their buck than CA.

[Sammy Pepys]

3. I just can't get behind an executive popular vote.

It carries much of the same problems as the electoral college does, and would require a pretty significant overhaul of the system. I also find it ironic a former Senator (whose son is a Senator, though that doesn't really have anything to do with it) is supportive of this.

Flame away.

[SuperWonk]

5. Well,

"It carries much of the same problems as the electoral college does, and would require a pretty significant overhaul of the system."

I don't think it will be as big a deal as you think.
You see, the states have this power, so there is no need for a constitutional amendment.

And who in their right mind would vote against this?

[Catchawave]

6. K&R for Sen. Bayh !

[SuperWonk]

7. I'm glad...

that this campaign is attracting attention from people that actually have some recognition.
As more people get on board, I think this could really create a lot of momentum.

[Bill McBlueState]

8. here's another article about it from the New Yorker

COUNT ’EM
Author: Hendrik Hertzberg

Last Thursday morning, in one of the smaller function rooms at the National Press Club, in Washington, an ad-hoc bunch of amateurs, once-weres, might-bes, and goo-goos floated an initiative that, with a little luck, could enable our ramshackle republic to take a long, and long overdue, step toward a more perfect union. The idea behind their initiative is this: that the President of the United States should be elected by the people of the United States.

This idea is neither new nor outlandish, but for most of the past couple of centuries it has been dismissed as unachievable. The Electoral College is enshrined in the Constitution itself, so getting rid of it would require the concurrence of two-thirds of both houses of Congress plus three-quarters of the state legislatures. That’s not going to happen.

But maybe it doesn’t have to. The promoters of the Campaign for a National Popular Vote, as they’re calling themselves, have come up with an elegant finesse. Instead of trying to change the Constitution, they propose to apply it, one bit in particular: Article II, Section 1, which instructs each state to “appoint” its Presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” Here’s how the plan would work. One by one, legislature by legislature, state law by state law, individual states would pledge themselves to an interstate compact under which they would agree to award their electoral votes to the nationwide winner of the popular vote. The compact would take effect only when enough states had joined it to elect a President—that is, enough to cast a majority of the five hundred and thirty-eight electoral votes. (Theoretically, as few as eleven states could do the trick.) And then, presto! All of a sudden, the people of all fifty states plus the District of Columbia are empowered to elect their President the same way they elect their governors, mayors, senators, and congressmen. We still have the Electoral College, with its colorful eighteenth-century rituals, but it can no longer do any damage. It becomes a tourist attraction, like the British monarchy.

continued here

[depakid]

9. Crikey, Birch Bayh is still alive?

One can only wonder what he thinks of his Quisling son....

[SuperWonk]

10. Thanks for posting...

The new yorker article - that really gets at the heart of the matter.

What can be more clear than this:

"For fifty years, polls have consistently shown that seventy per cent of the public favors direct election."

Time to get this done.