What Would It Take to Abolish the Electoral College

Bills have been introduced in the Us Congress on several occasions to amend the Usa Constitution to abolish or to reduce the ability of the Electoral Higher and to provide for the straight popular election of the Usa president and vice president.

Bayh–Celler subpoena (1969) [edit]

The closest that the U.s.a. has come to abolishing the Electoral Higher occurred during the 91st Congress (1969–1971).^[ane] The presidential election of 1968 resulted in Richard Nixon receiving 301 electoral votes (56% of electors), Hubert Humphrey 191 (35.5%), and George Wallace 46 (eight.5%) with 13.five% of the popular vote. All the same, Nixon had received only 511,944 more popular votes than Humphrey, 43.5% to 42.nine%, less than 1% of the national total.^[2]

Representative Emanuel Celler (D–New York), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, responded to public concerns over the disparity between the popular vote and electoral vote by introducing Firm Joint Resolution 681, a proposed constitutional subpoena to supervene upon the Electoral College with a simpler two-round system based on the national popular vote similar to that used in French presidential elections. The proposed system would have the pair of candidates who received the highest number of votes win the presidency and the vice presidency if they won at least 40% of the national popular vote. If no pair won at least 40% of the popular vote, a runoff ballot would be held in which the pick of president and vice president would be made from the two pairs of persons who had received the highest number of votes in the start election. The word "pair" was defined every bit "2 persons who shall have consented to the joining of their names as candidates for the offices of President and Vice President."^[3]

On April 29, 1969, the Firm Judiciary Committee voted 28 to 6 to approve the proposal.^[4] Argue on the proposal before the full House of Representatives ended on September 11, 1969^[five] and was eventually passed with bipartisan support on September 18, 1969, by a vote of 339 to seventy.^[6] On September 30, 1969, President Nixon gave his endorsement for adoption of the proposal and encouraging the Senate to pass its version of the proposal, which had been sponsored every bit Senate Joint Resolution one by Senator Birch Bayh (D–Indiana).^[7]

On October 8, 1969, the New York Times reported that thirty country legislatures were "either certain or likely to approve a ramble amendment embodying the straight election plan if it passes its last Congressional exam in the Senate." Ratification of 38 country legislatures would have been needed for adoption. The paper also reported that six other states had nevertheless to country a preference, 6 were leaning toward opposition, and eight were solidly opposed.^[8]

On August 14, 1970, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent its written report advocating passage of the proposal to the full Senate. The Judiciary Committee had approved the proposal by a vote of 11 to 6. The vi members who opposed the programme, Autonomous Senators James Eastland of Mississippi, John Little McClellan of Arkansas, and Sam Ervin of N Carolina, along with Republican Senators Roman Hruska of Nebraska, Hiram Fong of Hawaii, and Strom Thurmond of Due south Carolina, all argued that although the present system had potential loopholes, it had worked well throughout the years. Bayh indicated that supporters of the measure were almost a dozen votes shy from the 67 needed for the proposal to pass the full Senate.^[9] He called upon Nixon to endeavour to persuade undecided Republican senators to support the proposal.^[10] Nixon did not renege on his previous endorsement, but he chose not to make any further personal appeals to back the proposal.^[11]

On September viii, 1970, the Senate commenced open up debate on the proposal,^[12] merely information technology was speedily filibustered. The lead objectors to the proposal were mostly southern senators and conservatives from small states, both Democrats and Republicans, who argued that abolishing the Electoral College would reduce their states' political influence.^[xi] On September 17, 1970, a motion for cloture, which would have ended the delay, received 54 votes to 36 for cloture^[11] and failed to receive the required two-thirds majority of senators voting.^[13] A 2nd motion for cloture on September 29, 1970, besides failed past 53 to 34. Thereafter, Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana moved to lay the proposal aside so the Senate could attend to other business organization.^[14] However, the proposal was never considered once more and died when the 91st Congress ended on January 3, 1971.

Every Vote Counts Amendment (2005) [edit]

The Every Vote Counts Amendment was a joint resolution to amend the US Constitution to provide for the popular election of the president and the vice president under a new electoral organization. The proposed constitutional amendment sought to abolish the Electoral College and to have every presidential election determined by a plurality of the national vote. It was introduced by United states Representative Gene Dark-green (D) Texas on January 4, 2005.

Green then again introduced the legislation on January 7, 2009 every bit H.J.Res. 9. Later, 2 similar articulation resolutions were introduced, a measure out sponsored past U.s.a. Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D) Illinois, H.J.Res. 36, which would crave a bulk vote for president, and one sponsored by Senator Beak Nelson (D) Florida, S.J.Res. 4, which would leave the method of election to an Act of Congress. All three resolutions died in committee during the 111th Congress.

Text of proposed amendment [edit]

Section 1. The President and Vice President shall be elected past the people of the several States and the district constituting the seat of government of the U.s.a..
Department 2. The electors in each State shall accept the qualifications requisite for electors of Senators and Representatives in Congress from that Land, except that the legislature of any State may prescribe less restrictive qualifications with respect to residence and Congress may constitute uniform residence and age qualifications.
Section 3. The persons having the greatest number of votes for President and Vice President shall be elected.
Section iv. Each elector shall bandage a unmarried vote jointly applicable to President and Vice President. Names of candidates may not be joined unless they shall take consented thereto and no candidate may consent to the candidate's name being joined with that of more than than one other person.
Section 5. The Congress may by police provide for the case of the decease of whatsoever candidate for President or Vice President before the mean solar day on which the President-elect or Vice President-elect has been called, and for the case of a necktie in whatever election.
Department 6. This article shall apply with respect to any election for President and Vice President held subsequently the expiration of the 1-year menses which begins on the date of the ratification of this article.

Background [edit]

Department 1, 3, and iv relate to the process of the election. Department 1 states that the President and the Vice President volition be elected by the residents of states and the District of Columbia. Section 3 states that the election is won by the candidate supported by a plurality of the votes cast. In that location is no provision for a runoff in the consequence that no candidate wins past an overall majority. Section 4 pushes the articulation candidacy requirement enacted by all states. To prevent misinterpretation for voters by having too many choices, candidates may not exist joined by more one other person on the ballot.

Section 2 relates to the voter qualifications in three implementations. The first implementation is reusing requirements for qualification to vote that were established and used for the electoral system. Those qualifications are stated in Commodity 1, Section 2, and in the 17th Amendment and are further defined by the 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments. The 2d implementation would touch on the resident periods in states to permit states to brand little to no waiting periods to vote if one inverse residence of state. The third and last implementation would permit Congress to input age requirements for elections and constitute uniform residence, which could supercede the 26th Amendment and make the age requirement higher or lower.

Section 5 would give power to Congress. If the amendment was put into identify, and a candidate dies or there is a necktie betwixt two candidates, it would let Congress to brand decisions depending on the issue if it was to have place such equally postponing an election. Department 5 gives more ability to Congress over the ballot process and system.

Section vi relates to how the Amendment come into effect. As long as the amendment is put into place one year before the next election, the subpoena would be used for the next presidential election.

Boxer and Cohen proposals (2016) [edit]

On November 15, 2016, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California) introduced a proposal to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct popular election of the President and Vice President of the U.s. past the voters in the various states and the Commune of Columbia.^{[15] [16]} Representative Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee) introduced a companion resolution in the House of Representatives on January 5, 2017.^[17] Unlike the Bayh–Celler amendment 40% threshold for election, Cohen'south proposal requires a candidate to take but the "greatest number of votes" to be elected.^[18]

See also [edit]

• Efforts to reform the United States Electoral College
• List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution
• List of United States presidential elections in which the winner lost the popular vote
• National Popular Vote Interstate Meaty

References [edit]

1. ^ For a more than detailed account of the proposal, read The Politics of Balloter Higher Reform by Lawrence D. Longley and Alan G. Braun (1972)
2. ^ 1968 Electoral College Results, National Archives and Records Administration
3. ^ "Text of Proposed Amendment on Voting". The New York Times. April 30, 1969. p. 21.
4. ^ "House Unit Votes To Drop Electors". The New York Times. April thirty, 1969. p. ane.
5. ^ "Directly Ballot of President Is Gaining in the Business firm". The New York Times. September 12, 1969. p. 12.
6. ^ "House Approves Straight Election of The President". The New York Times. September 19, 1969. p. 1.
7. ^ "Nixon Comes Out For Straight Vote On Presidency". The New York Times. October 1, 1969. p. one.
8. ^ "A Survey Finds thirty Legislatures Favor Straight Vote For President". The New York Times. October eight, 1969. p. one.
9. ^ Weaver, Warren (Apr 24, 1970). "Senate Unit of measurement Asks Popular Election of the President". The New York Times. p. 1.
10. ^ "Bayh Calls for Nixon'due south Support Equally Senate Gets Balloter Plan". The New York Times. Baronial 15, 1970. p. 11.
11. ^ ^{a b c} Weaver, Warren (September 18, 1970). "Senate Refuses To Halt Debate On Direct Voting". The New York Times. p. 1.
12. ^ "Senate Debating Direct Election". The New York Times. September nine, 1970. p. 10.
13. ^ The Senate in 1975 reduced the required vote for cloture from ii thirds of those voting (67 votes) to 3 fifths (lx votes). Run into United States Senate website.
14. ^ "Senate Puts Off Direct Vote Plan". The New York Times. September 30, 1970. p. 1.
15. ^ Printing release (November 15, 2016). "Boxer Introduces Pecker To Abolish The Electoral College". Senator Barbara Boxer. Archived from the original on November xvi, 2016. Retrieved February 24, 2018.
16. ^ 114th Congress, Due south.J.Res. 41
17. ^ Brown, George (January v, 2017). "Congressman Cohen proposes elimination of Electoral College". WREG-Television. Retrieved January 7, 2017.
18. ^ H.J. Res. 19

External links [edit]

• GovTrack.us
• Library of Congress ^{[ permanent dead link ]}

gaudetteanter1972.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_abolition_amendment

Share this post