<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Aug 15th: &#8220;A Civil Action to Democratize the Electoral College&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/aug-15th-a-civil-action-to-democratize-the-electoral-college/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/aug-15th-a-civil-action-to-democratize-the-electoral-college/</link>
	<description>Covering America's third parties and independent candidates since May 2008</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:47:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mvymvy</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/aug-15th-a-civil-action-to-democratize-the-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-91085</link>
		<dc:creator>mvymvy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:23:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=9442#comment-91085</guid>
		<description>The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). 

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. 

The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). 

The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law on how those votes are awarded. 

The bill is currently endorsed by over 1,659 state legislators (in 48 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 29 state legislative chambers, in small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon,  and both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington. These five states possess 61 electoral votes -- 23% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). </p>
<p>Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. </p>
<p>The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes&#8211;that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). </p>
<p>The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law on how those votes are awarded. </p>
<p>The bill is currently endorsed by over 1,659 state legislators (in 48 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.</p>
<p>The National Popular Vote bill has passed 29 state legislative chambers, in small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon,  and both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington. These five states possess 61 electoral votes &#8212; 23% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.</p>
<p>See <a href="http://www.NationalPopularVote.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kimberly Wilder</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/aug-15th-a-civil-action-to-democratize-the-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-90007</link>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Wilder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=9442#comment-90007</guid>
		<description>Peter, thanks for the great question...

The lawsuit is against the two Vice Presidents in their capacity as President of the Senate. It started in 2008, when Cheney was VP, but would now affect Biden. The lawsuit is about how the VP should count (or not count) votes from electors to the Electoral College 

The premise is that the malaportionment penalty (a part of the 14th amendment of the Constitution) means that a state&#039;s votes cannot be counted under certain circumstances, where they are disenfranchising people. In part, Asa says that a state is disenfranchising voters if they report their votes as &quot;Winner Take All&quot;, when in fact, they should report proportionally.

Oddly, there are many states where there is absolutely no state law that says &quot;winner take all&quot;, but they do winner take all. People just kind of fake it and report it that way out of tradition.

There is a 10 minute video of Asa which explains it pretty well at our youtube site: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBp5NrmdKOs</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, thanks for the great question&#8230;</p>
<p>The lawsuit is against the two Vice Presidents in their capacity as President of the Senate. It started in 2008, when Cheney was VP, but would now affect Biden. The lawsuit is about how the VP should count (or not count) votes from electors to the Electoral College </p>
<p>The premise is that the malaportionment penalty (a part of the 14th amendment of the Constitution) means that a state&#8217;s votes cannot be counted under certain circumstances, where they are disenfranchising people. In part, Asa says that a state is disenfranchising voters if they report their votes as &#8220;Winner Take All&#8221;, when in fact, they should report proportionally.</p>
<p>Oddly, there are many states where there is absolutely no state law that says &#8220;winner take all&#8221;, but they do winner take all. People just kind of fake it and report it that way out of tradition.</p>
<p>There is a 10 minute video of Asa which explains it pretty well at our youtube site: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBp5NrmdKOs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBp5NrmdKOs</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Orvetti</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/aug-15th-a-civil-action-to-democratize-the-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-89880</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Orvetti</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 02:57:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=9442#comment-89880</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m curious about this lawsuit.  Why is it against the two vice presidents?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious about this lawsuit.  Why is it against the two vice presidents?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

