National Popular Vote vs. Electoral College - You decide!

• < Previous Event
• Next Event >

Comment

Comment by patriotm1 on November 2, 2011 at 2:57pm

Is there definitive information as to who is actually funding this movement and the actual success and specific state-by-state tactics used/planned?

Comment by Joseph M Lenard (JLenardDetroit) on October 29, 2011 at 1:08pm

UPDATE: courtesy TPPWOMi:
Tea Party Patriots of West Oakland County
Dear Michigan Patriots,
There is a "Presentations and testimony" regarding
the National Popular Vote in the Redistricting and Elections Committee in
Lansing on November 1st.

In a nutshell the National Popular Vote
is:

NPV is a political scheme cooked up originally by
Liberals who were irate over Gore losing to Bush.

Although it does not replace the Electoral College exactly it circumvents it

by a compact that states enter into that decides the Presidential election by
the “popular vote” of those states. Only if enough states have
joined to ensure that the result will be to hand the presidency to
the popular-vote “winner.” It’s clever because it avoids the need
for a constitutional amendment, which requires a two-thirds vote in
Congress and approval of 38 (3 of 4) state egislatures. Further,
legislatures COULD vote their state out of the Compact
AFTER the election! The ensuing chaos would make


So even though there has been no bill introduced in the
House (Rep. Matt Lori was tapped) The House Committee has scheduled
"Presentations and testimony" regarding National Popular Vote" in the
Redistricting and Elections Committee.

Why? Because there is big money behind the NPV movement in order to
get states to enter into the Compact to achieve a
controlling majority of the Electoral College (currently 270 of
the total 538 electoral votes.) And that includes
Michigan!

Having "Presentations and testimony" now can speed up a vote
when a bill is introduced!

It is imperative that this be stopped in
Michigan
FOR THOSE WHO CAN
ATTEND:
Date: 11/1/2011
Time: 9:00 AM
Meeting: Standing Committee Meeting
Redistricting and Elections
Chair: Representative Pete Lund
Location: 521 House Office Building,



Regards,

Joan Fabiano

Grassroots in Michigan
http://grassrootsmichigan.com/




"A fondness for power is
implanted, in most men, and it is natural
to abuse it, when acquired."
--Alexander Hamilton,
The Farmer Refuted, 1775



A link to a Goggle map of location of downtown area :

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=519+of+the+House+Office+Building+124+...

A map of Public Parking (PP) is located below

Please e-mail me at grassrootsinmi@gmail.com IF YOU PLAN ON ATTENDING



IF YOU CAN NOT MAKE
THE MEETING:

Showing up at a Committee Meeting is ALWAYS preferable
and has the highest impact on a bill making it out of Committee or dying however
this is a good way for your voice to be heard
All you have to do is:

1. Send an e-mail TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE CLERK
Mary Lou Terrien, at mterrie@house.mi.gov

Subject: NPV

2. Address e-mail to “Redistricting and Elections
Committee Members”

Tell the Committee Members you are against a National
Popular Vote Compact in Michigan. It can be
as simple as that or you can give a longer reason(s)

SHOULD include Name, address, County, City, e-mail

3. Ask the clerk to enter your e-mail into the record.
He will give each member of the Committee a copy of your e-mail

Thank you for all you do for Michigan and our
Republic,

Comment by Joseph M Lenard (JLenardDetroit) on July 1, 2011 at 12:50am

The "Winner Take All" Electoral Votes is a different issue and completely the purvue of each and every State to decide! They can Winner-Take-All or any portion they so desire by matter of State Legislation (or State Constitution, if it were addressed within). Tell you what, the thought is great until YOUR CANDIDATE would win the POTUS post had you NOT deluted (split) your Delegates! Remember, a blade can cut the holder if he/she is careless. You assume Michigan will continue to go Blue for POTUS Elections.
see related/cross-referenced: Exporting/Expanding BLUEism discussion.

Comment by Tim Reno on June 24, 2011 at 12:00pm

I talked to Kent Peterson this morning & he sounded more confused about the whole issue after attending last night. Now I'm glad I didn't go.

I still don't like the fact that just because a candidate "wins" a state, they get all the electoral votes. I think it should be weighed even down to a decimal point or two. Illinois is a good example. The whole state goes the way Chicago goes. My son said it was a waste of his time to go vote. Now he lives in Iowa and it's the same way. 

We need some HONEST people in office who will do the RIGHT thing instead of what will get them elected the next time.

Comment by William on June 24, 2011 at 7:52am

Very interesting debate last night. Laura, a former MN state legislator made some valid arguments. Her comments about state compacts is important because the topic of ObamaCare came up last night.
Sen Colbeck and Rep Tom McMillan want to form a Michigan Health Care Compact so the State of Michigan can opt out of ObamaCare. The link for the health care compact can be found here
http://www.healthcarecompact.org/michigan

Comment by Tim Reno on June 23, 2011 at 3:50pm

Kind of short notice. Hope to catch the next one!

Comment by Joseph M Lenard (JLenardDetroit) on June 22, 2011 at 4:59pm

To add to my previous (somewhat incoherent, as I had too many thoughts running through my brain and did none of them justice) post - Those that believe in American Exceptionalism and that the U.S. is the greatest, as Free, government desinged on the face of the planet know - we want to remain, as Founded, a Constitutional Republic and not a MOBocracy (read Coulters latest "Demonic"). The 17th Amendment harmed that/those principles and purposes of/for 'protections' against Mob (pure Democratic) rule and "Popular Vote" election of the President will completely eliminate the little remaining protections of smaller [rural/population] States.

 

CA (you may, or may not, have heard on the news lately)  is dreaming up ignoring the Constitution and alloting their Electoral Delegates based on National Popular Vote -- which they will quickly change their tune if the Republican Candidate gets the most votes and would switch what would (of late always) be going to the Democrat Presidential candidate based on Popular vote within CA (Mob rule of their urban centers over the rest of their State, which is what the Popular Vote crowd wants to impose upon ALL States).

 

--- regards, JLenardDetroit

Comment by Joseph M Lenard (JLenardDetroit) on June 22, 2011 at 3:57pm

Some people never learn from history (read: mistakes). The 17th Amendment portends the future folly of the Popular Vote movement, but then again many of them are Progressives purposefully looking to "transform America" to Socialist Europe. Those of us who understand the notion and import of States' Rights have only the 17th Amendment (which should be repealed) removed the Key States protection and moving away from the Electoral College (in even any minor modification) will completely destroy the protections of the smaller [population/rural] States. For more on 17th Amendment search "redstate" + "17th Amendment" (and you can add "JLenardDetroit", if you want to see my specific comments regarding).

Comment by patriotm1 on June 19, 2011 at 9:30pm

Will be out of town or would attend.  This is a critically important topic.

States rights are the last line of defense against big government and an activist judiciary.

 

Popular vote is mob rule achievable through controlling a few large cities in any state.  Outstate (non-city) voting proportionality currently protected by the electoral college will be lost if popular vote rules.

The holy grail of those wanting control is to eliminate the electoral college and replace it with popular vote.  Political machinery, biased media, etc., could be easily used to foment or sway popular vote elections.

 

This topic is a no-brainer -- fight to keep the electoral college and the Tea Parties can help.