Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Statistical

(19,264 posts)

8. In VA vs TN the Supreme Court rules that only compacts which ...

Reply to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 24, 2016, 09:32 PM

Nov 2016

increase the power of the states over the federal government require congressional approval.

Since compact or not states determine their electors and compact or not those electors determine the President it is hard to make an argument this diminishes the power of the federal govt. It may diminish the power of some states (*cough* swing states *cough*) but that wasn't the deciding factor in Virginia v. Tennessee.

Still let's assume that the courts did rule it required congressional approval before it could go into effect. That barrier (straight majority) is far easier than the barrier for a constitutional amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

There is a way to bypass the Electoral College without a constitutional ammendment. [View all] Statistical Nov 2016 OP

K&R nt eppur_se_muova Nov 2016 #1

That's right. This information needs to be repeated everywhere until it becomes lunamagica Nov 2016 #2

I agree that would be a great thing; but some states aren't likely to sign it ever el_bryanto Nov 2016 #3

Yep SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #4

In VA vs TN the Supreme Court rules that only compacts which ... Statistical Nov 2016 #8

True some states won't sign however it only requires states totalling 270 votes. Statistical Nov 2016 #5

The irony is that the country would be much better off were stopbush Nov 2016 #6

I totally agree; but you can't expect people int those states to agree with that unfortunately. nt el_bryanto Nov 2016 #7

Really? So CA and NY should choose the president? With no input from small states? Sorry jack_krass Nov 2016 #9

He didn't say they should just that the voters would probably be better off. Statistical Nov 2016 #10

I prefer that to the South getting to pick our presidents. stopbush Nov 2016 #11

I currently live in a rural state and the people consistnely vote against their own self-interests. white_wolf Nov 2016 #12