Will the electoral college benefit Republicans?

Why Are California Republicans Against the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?

This is the official position of the Republican Party, but not necessarily the position of the members or the Republican Party. In the 2008 poll, 70% of California residents and likely voters supported the change of president through direct referendum, while 21% of residents and 22% of likely voters preferred the current electoral college. Democrats (76%) and Independents (74%) were more likely to be in favor of changing the direct referendum than Republicans, however 61% of Republicans also supported the change . Among the likely voters, support for the change was 6 points higher than in October 2004 (64%).

Some notable members of the California Republican Party who support net present value include:

  • James Brulte served as Republican leader of the California State Assembly from 1992 to 1996, Senator to the California State from 1996 to 2004, and Republican Senate Chairman from 2000 to 2004.
  • Ray Haynes was the 2000 national chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). He served in the California Senate from 1994 to 2002 and was elected to the congregation in 1992 and 2002

History of the national referendum

Since the Founding Fathers could not agree on a particular method for selecting the presidential election, they left the choice of method solely to the states in Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution. "Each state directly appoints a number of voters in the manner established by law ..." The US Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of state lawmakers over the manner in which their votes are cast as "plenary" and "exclusive" .

The national referendum bill would change the existing laws that give all electoral votes from a state to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each individual state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states) into one system , which guarantees a majority of the vote of the electoral college and the presidency of the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the entire United States.

The draft law preserves the constitutionally required electoral college and state control of the elections. It ensures that every vote is equal, every voter plays a role in every state and in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

In the national referendum, every vote would be politically relevant everywhere and would be the same in every presidential election. Any vote would be included in the state and national censuses.

If states with a total of at least 270 votes pass the bill, the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would receive the required 270+ votes from the approving states. The bill would thus guarantee the presidency to the candidate who received the most popular votes.

The national referendum would give the voters of the minority party one vote in each state. Now their votes are only counted for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they are no longer important to their candidate. In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters used the winner-all rule to redirect their vote to a candidate they rejected (namely their state's candidate in first place).

And now votes in excess of the votes required for most votes in the state to win in a state are wasted and of no concern to the candidates. Utah alone (5 votes) achieved a lead of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004. Eight small western states with less than a third of California's population gave Bush a bigger head start (1,283,076) than California Kerry (1,235,659).

Bobson

This is a great round up of what this pact does and why states as a whole would want it, but it doesn't really go into the question of why Republicans are against what the OP is asking for. So +1 for informative and -1 for not related to the topic.

toto

You'd have to ask a Republican who opposes capital value. Republican supporters include: James Brulte served as Republican chairman of the California State Assembly from 1992 to 1996, a Senator to the California state from 1996 to 2004, and Republican Senate chairman from 2000 to 2004. Ray Haynes was national chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 2000. He served in the California Senate from 1994 to 2002 and was elected to the congregation in 1992 and 2002

toto

In the 2008 poll, 70% of California residents and likely voters supported the change of president through direct referendum, while 21% of residents and 22% of likely voters preferred the current electoral college. Democrats (76%) and Independents (74%) were more likely than Republicans to be in favor of the direct referendum change, but 61% of Republicans also supported the change. Among the likely voters, support for the change was 6 points higher than in October 2004 (64%). - NationalPopularVote.com

Bobson

Interesting ... So the answer to the OP could be, "You're not really against it" or at least, "You're not really against it as a group". If you edit something like that in your answer, you will get my dissenting vote. Welcome to Politics.SE!

SoylentGray

I edited your comments in your reply. You have some great information here. I hope you will agree with the editing.