[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers

View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
Web Calitics

Brown Signs National Popular Vote Compact

by: Brian Leubitz

Mon Aug 08, 2011 at 13:40:05 PM PDT

By Brian Leubitz

Gov. Brown just signed AB 459, Jerry Hill's bill to join the national popular vote compact:

Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation this morning committing California to an interstate compact to award electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the most votes nationwide.
*** **** ***
For too long, presidential candidates have ignored California and our issues while pandering exclusively to the battleground states," the bill's author, Assemblyman Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, said in a written statement. "A national popular vote will force candidates to actually campaign in California and talk about our issues." (SacBee)

Basically, the Compact would become effective when enough votes in the electoral college are bound by the compact.  Before today's signature, 8 states and DC signed up for 74 votes committed, California's 55 gives a total of 129.  If the remaining 142 votes commit, we could be looking a vastly different political landscape.

Brian Leubitz :: Brown Signs National Popular Vote Compact
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

132 Electoral Votes = 49% of the way (5.00 / 2)
The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL,CA, NJ, MD, MA, VT, and WA. These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes-- 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

this is an interesting game theory problem. (0.00 / 0)
what is there to prevent a state which (a) has committed to this, (b) voted differently than the popular vote majority, and (c) is governed by the opposing party, from changing the law in that state just before midnight on the day before the electoral college votes, throwing the election into utter confusion?

Nothing (0.00 / 0)
But then the electoral college can be viewed entirely as game theory.

There is nothing that forces the electors to vote for the current winner of the state's popular vote.  (Caveat, there may be a state law they'd violate.)  Remember 2000?  There was an effort to convince electors in some states to switch to Gore from Bush since Gore won the popular vote.

For example, in 2004 an elector in Minnesota voted for John Edwards for president, so the official vote tally was Bush 286 Kerry 251 Edwards 1

So, even if we reach 270 votes commited to the national vote winner, there's no guarantee they'd all vote that way.

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads

blog advertising is good for you

Support Calitics:

Buy on Amazon through us.


Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary

Powered by: SoapBlox