2008 House Bill 400 (Elect President by popular vote)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Ruth Ann Palumbo on January 29, 2008, to create an agreement among the states to elect the President and Vice President by national popular vote.
- Referred to the House Elections, Const. Amendments & Intergovernmental Affairs Committee on January 30, 2008.
- Reported in the House on March 11, 2008, favorably, 1st reading, to Calendar.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Ruth Ann Palumbo on January 29, 2008. New Comment

1) National Popular Vote [by Anonymous Citizen on March 11, 2008]
A national popular vote is the way we should elect the President. It is very simple for me . . . the candidate who gets the most votes should win the election. That doesn't happen with the Electoral College. Furthermore, every vote should be equal. That is not the case today. Candidates spend all of their time and resources in the few "swing" states. Kentucky, as a "safe" state is ignored in the general election. This bill makes sense.

Reply New Comment

Line

2) HB-400 [by Anonymous Citizen on March 11, 2008]
I agree this makes sense.We should be electing a usa presidential and vice-presidential candicates by popular vote only.
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Do NOT eliminate the Electoral College [by newmark on January 31, 2008]
There is a very good reason for the electoral college.

When I was in High School, I was all for becoming a pure democracy. After further studying American history and politics, I changed my view completely.

America's first constitution was the Articles of Confederation. Under that system, the states were actually individual governments, aligned for defense purposes (against Britain or whomever). Each state was autonomous.

After a decade or so, it was obvious that the alliance between the states wasn't working as well as hoped. The supplying of military for national defense was voluntary, and so the new country couldn't organize defense. Britain was involved in "guerella economics", starving particular states, especially in the south, to drive down cotton prices.

So this wasn't good. Delegates from each state came together to "fix" the Articles. Instead of fixing the Articles (and actually against the law under the Articles), they came out with the Constitution instead. This was ratified and became the law.

Under the new Constitution, states still had many rights, guarenteed under the Bill of Rights. Look at the 10th Amendment, if you need any evidence that there was a strong pro-state (I hesitate to use the term "State's Rights") attitude. Anything not in the Constitution is supposed to be the responsibility of the states.

So the idea behind elections for President, and the electoral college, is that we're still a group of independent governments operating under a larger umbrella with limited powers.

Over time, of course, the Federal Government has grown in power by usurping the power of the States. But we should not *encourage* this to continue. We should try to reverse this!

People in Kentucky want to live differently than those that live in California. And that's great! If you, as a Kentuckian, like how they live in California better, you can *move* to California, and vice-versa.

Imagine if each of the states had their own systems of government, more drastically different from each other than they are today. Everyone could find a place to live where they feel most-like the other people in those states. It's the way that people can live under a large umbrella government -- deal only with national defense and international trade at the federal level, and let other social and internal issues be handled at the state and local level. Everyone can find a place to live in harmony with their neighbors.
Reply New Comment

Line

4) Voter [by Mary R. Birge on January 30, 2008]
Here, here, I totally agree. Presidential races should be unanimous among the voters, not by an electoral vote. I think the electoral vote process is unfair. The individual people in the country are the ones voting for themselves,and their views, we do not need someone else deciding for us.
Reply New Comment

Line

Home
Create an account
Legislation watch
Search Legislation
Search Voting Record
Reports
- Recent Laws
- Missed Votes Report
Links
About
Tell a friend about this site