The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between June 13th and 15th of a nationwide sample of 1,549 adults (including 1,403 registered voters). The margin of error is 3.5 points for adults and 3.4 points for registered voters.
The U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8) gives Congress the power “To declare War,” and the War Powers Resolution of 1973 — enacted over Nixon’s veto — mandates that troops be withdrawn within 60 days unless Congress extends the deadline or declares war.
On Thursday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed that Trump doesn’t need Congress’s approval to continue the war past the 60-day mark because the ceasefire agreement with Iran has effectively stopped the clock. (Trump echoed Hegseth’s claim today in a letter to Congress.)
That’s bullshit, of course. But the interesting question is why — when Republicans have majorities in both chambers of Congress — Trump doesn’t want such a vote. Why not just let Republicans vote in favor of continuing his war, and be done with it?
It’s possible, of course, that Trump is worried that some Republican members might vote against the war — joining with all or almost all Democrats in voting against its continuation. Even a close vote could force a debate and pressure Trump to set the conditions and timeline for a withdrawal.
But there’s an easier and more straightforward reason.
Trump’s war is so unpopular that Republican members of Congress don’t want to have to go on record as voting in favor of it. With midterm elections in six months, they know their votes in favor of Trump’s war could be held over their heads — especially if the war drags on, or if gas prices continue to rise because Iran is blocking the Strait of Hormuz, or both.
They’ve let the White House know that forcing them to vote on the war will hurt their chances of maintaining control of Congress.
So congressional Republicans are choosing the coward’s way out: agree with Hegseth and Trump that there’s no need for such a vote because the ceasefire has tolled the clock. Or claim, even more absurdly (as has Speaker of the House Mike Johnson) that there’s no “war” to begin with, and hence no reason for such a vote.
Republicans in Congress are not brave people. To the contrary, they may be the most cowardly group ever to claim to represent the American people.
Last week, Donald Trump was calling Republican House members who had signed the discharge petition (requiring a vote on release of the Epstein files) and trying to pressure them to remove their names from the petition. It was his desperate last ditch effort to block the vote, and made it perfectly clear that he did not want the entirety of those files released. Why? Most likely because it would embarrass him.
He failed. And it became clear that not only would a vote happen, but many Republicans would vote for the petition making it easily pass.
That would have been humiliating for Trump. So, to avoid that humiliation, he flip-flopped on the issue. He told Republicans they should vote for the petition. Then he went further and said he would sign it into law once it reached his desk (as it became clear the Senate would also likely pass it).
Trump is now trying to pose as a champion of releasing the files (after years of opposing their release). Don't believe it. Trump is still opposed to releasing all of the Epstein files. He just knows he can't stop the petition from passing - and he doesn't want to be the person who vetoes it (since most of his MAGA supporter want them released).
But don't be fooled. Donald Trump will NEVER release ALL of the Epstein files. If he wanted the files released, he already has the power to do that. All he has to do is tell AG Bondi to release them.
But he doesn't want that. How will he avoid doing it once the release petition becomes law?
You must realize that Trump doesn't care about the law. He has been a lawbreaker most of his adult life, and doing it one more time will not bother him in the least.
He will release a lot of the files. And he will claim that is all of them - but it won't be. Anything in those files that make him look bad will be withheld. And his sycophants (Bondi and Patel) will lie for him and claim everything was released. And the remaining DOJ and FBI employees, knowing they would be instantly fired if they even hint at the truth will keep their mouths shut.
Trump will never release all the files - and the public is unlikely to know that until his presidency is over (if ever).
The Tuesday vote in the House was nothing more than an interesting bit of political theater to make the Republicans look better. But it does not mean all of the files will be released. Trump does what he want - whether it is legal or not.
The bill must now go back to the House because of changes the Senate made to the bill passed previously by the House.
The Republicans passed a bill that a majority of the voters don't want. They passed a bill that takes desperately needed funds from the poor and working classes to give it to the rich (who don't need it). And they did it to please a narcissist who doesn't care about them or their party.
They knew what they were doing. It is the most blatant example of cruelty and political cowardice I've ever seen!
But none of those past elections were as important is this election. That's because this election is about much more basic things. It will define what kind of people the majority of Americans are and what kind of country the United States really is.
How do you want to be defined, and what kind of country do you want?
Are you a racist who want only whites to have and exercise power? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want.
Do you oppose religious freedom and want laws reflecting the Bible - not the Constitution? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want?
Do you want the Constitution ignored and the law to be used to punish political opponents? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want.
Do you want immigrants demonized and deported - even many documented immigrants? That's what Donald Trump and his supporters want.
Do you want women to be second-class citizens - unable to control their own bodies or oppose the desires of men? That's what Donald Trump and his supporters want.
Do you want the minimum wage to be a poverty wage - forcing millions of hard-working full time workers to live in poverty? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want.
Do you want the death of our democracy and the institution of authoritarian rule? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want.
Do you think billionaires should pay a lower tax rate than those in the working and middle classes? That's what Donald Trump and his followers want.
Donald Trump and his MAGA followers have a dark vision for this country. They don't respect the Constitution, rules of law, equal rights, or democracy. Voting for them would define Americans as racist, homophobic, misogynistics, and xenophobic. And it would turn our democratic country into a white power fascist state.
We can prevent this, but only if all of the country's decent and democratic-loving people vote.
You have the power to save this country from Trump's dark vision. Please vote - and make sure you friends and family do also. Every single vote is important in this election - whether in a red state, a blue state, or a swing state.
Don't be the one that stayed home on Election Day. You would always regret that.
But we must not forget the down-ballot races. They are equally important.
If Kamala Harris is elected, she will need a Democratic House and Senate. If Republicans control either house of Congress, then nothing can get done. The current version of the GOP has no interest in compromising for the good of the country, and will block anything Harris tries to do.
If Donald Trump is able to squeak out another electoral college win, it will be even more important to have Democrats controlling Congress. He has already told us what he wants to do. His agenda is dangerous - both for the country's democracy and its economy.
Trump could still do some damage with executive orders, but a Democratic Congress could any new laws to take away citizen rights or curtail our democratic system.
Make sure to vote for down-ballot Democrats!
As readers embark on the final stretch to Election Day, allow me to lighten your journey with a simple truth: There is nothing you can say or do along the way to convince Donald Trump’s MAGA disciples that he is unfit to be president of the United States.
The best you can do is to cast your sacred ballot, then turn your effortstoward getting all whose lives are linked with yours to the polls, so they can vote for the ticket that is loyal to American ideals, hopes and beliefs: Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Which leaves out “Make America Great Again” voters, whose obedience is to Trump.
At this point, with less than five weeks to go, any thought of influencing Trump’s followers to choose otherwise is tantamount to lunacy.
They have heard the words you have heard. They have seen what you have seen. The difference: You might find the former president’s words and deeds repugnant, but his core supporters’ adoration remains unwavering. . . .
In fact, some of them clearly love what they see and hear, simply because they know many of you don’t.
Don’t underestimate what’s at work on Election Day. Trump has managed to establish himself in the eyes of millions of Americans as the only person capable of “saving” this country, of restoring America’s greatness.
As if it was ever lost.
Trump conjures up an America overrun by the unwanted: dark invaders crossing our southern border. An LGBTQ+ community reshaping schools, churches and civic life. Uppity people of color with the nerve to stand up and talk back.
In casting himself as a genius deserving of unconditional devotion, Trump has pulled off quite a feat: amassing millions of followers who are going to vote for him no matter what he says or does.
They are what truly freedom-loving Americans are up against on Election Day.
This is why voting must come before all else. . . .
The decision is not Trump’s to make. He cannot crown himself. His MAGA cohort cannot praise and adore him into the White House. The choice is yours. Vote.
Slowly, that was rectified. A constitutional amendment and civil rights law extended that right to citizens that were not white - and another constitution amendment extended the right to women.
Many Americans now consider the right to vote is firmly established for all citizens (even though Republicans are currently trying to restrict the right of those they think might vote against them).
I disagree. The right to vote is still denied to millions of American citizens. I refer to the millions of prison inmates and people on probation or parole. State laws deny the right to vote for these people. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution about denying the right to vote for those convicted of a crime.
This is an additional punishment levied by states for the conviction. But a court has already decreed their punishment, and that was probation or incarceration. Why should the state be allowed to add another punishment?
In a democracy, the right to vote is sacred. It should not be denied to any citizen for any reason. Even though incarcerated or on probation, these people are still citizens - and the elected government (both state and federal) affects their lives - sometimes dramatically! They should still have a voice in determining the government.
I know that these people have committed a crime - sometimes a heinous crime. I'm not saying they shouldn't be punished. But that punishment should be left to a court of law. And the punishment should never include taking a citizens right to vote away from them.
When the right to vote is taken from one group, it endangers that right for all groups. The right to vote should never be taken away from any citizen - for any reason!
She was in the tiny group of GOP radicals that ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy. That resulted in a period of time when Congress was in chaos because the Republicans couldn't agree on a new Speaker. The radical fringe finally convinced other Republicans to agree to accept one of their own, and Mike Johnson became Speaker.
Greene evidently thought with a radical in the Speaker's chair, she and other radicals could force Congress to go along with their own crazy ideas Like shutting down the government and cutting off aid to Ukraine).
Greene was wrong. While Johnson is on the far right, he was not willing to shut down the government or cut off aid to Ukraine. To keep the government open and send needed aid to Ukraine, he reached out to Democrats - and Democrats, combined with many Republicans, passed both bills.
Greene blew her top, and filed a motion to kick Johnson out of the speakership. But she didn't ask for a vote, wanting to hold that possibility over his head to force him to meet her demands.She thought she was in control. She was wrong again.
Most Republicans are unhappy with her action, and don't want another vote on the Speaker. They know it would just create more chaos for Congress and their party.
Last week, I said Democrats should stay out of this GOP fight, and should just vote "present" on a vote to oust the Speaker. While Johnson is not a good Speaker, we don't need more chaos in Congress.
But Hakeem Jeffries (Democratic Minority Leader) had a better idea. He said if Marjorie Taylor Green ask for a vote to oust the Speaker, Democrats would move to table her request. If the motion to table won a majority vote, Greene's motion would not even get a vote.
The motion to table would win by a landslide (with most Republicans and all Democrats voting for it. I doubt if Greene can expect more than a dozen votes in her favor. She is about to be embarrassed, and shown just how little power she has in this Congress.
Most Republicans (and all Democrats) are sick of her insane kind of political theater!
The chart above is from a survey by the Pew Research Center -- done between November 16th and 27th of a national sample of 11,377 adults, with a 1.5 point margin of error.
Both of the senators claim they support the bills that would protect voting, and indeed, they voted yes on the motion to end the Gap filibuster. But it's easy to vote that way when you know there is no chance of the bill being considered. And sure enough, 50 Republican voted to maintain the filibuster against the voting rights bill (9 more than was needed to maintain the filibuster).
Then another vote was held. This vote was on whether to change the filibuster rules and allow a majority vote on the voting rights bill. It would not end the filibuster, It would just change the rule for only the voting rights bill. That would happen only if the Democrats got 50 votes and the vote of Vice-President Harris.
If Manchin and Sinema really supported the voting rights bill, this was their chance to show it -- and still maintain the filibuster. But they voted to kill the voting rights bill by voting to not change the filibuster. They voted to allow the Republicans to continue to filibuster the bill -- meaning it could not be passed without 60 votes.
Manchin and Sinema will probably still claim to support the bill, but that would be a lie. They had their chance to help pass it, and they refused to do it. They still consider an archaic Senate rule to be more important that the right of every U.S. citizens to vote.
They should be ashamed of themselves, but they aren't. I am left to wonder why they continue to call themselves Democrats.
On Sunday, Joe Manchin bragged on Fox News that he would vote against the Build Back Better bill. That effectively kills the bill, because it needed the votes of all 50 Democrats and Independents to pass. Why did he do that? Is it because he's rich -- he has his and doesn't care about anyone else -- especially the poor, workers, and middle class who are struggling to keep their heads above water in this inflationary recession? That's my opinion.
Here's what former Labor Secretary Robert Reich thinks at robertreich.sunstack.com:
I can’t resist opining on West Virginia senator Joe Manchin’s motive for announcing yesterday he won’t support the “Build Back Better” social and environmental package. He delivered the deathblow on Fox News Sunday (after refusing to take Joe Biden’s phone call presumably asking him not to make the announcement).
The reasons Manchin gave are absurd on their face. He must know that.
He said he’s worried about inflation and the national debt. But Build Back Better would be paid for with tax increases on big corporations and the wealthy — so it won’t have any bearing on inflation or the debt. More to the point, its sticker price of $1.75 trillion covers 10 years, during which the Congressional Budget Office projects $288 trillion worth of economic output. So a Build Back Better plan of $1.75 trillion or would amount to roughly 0.6% of gross domestic product — or slightly more than the 0.5% of GDP Americans spent last year on tobacco. And that doesn’t cover all the benefits to the economy of investing in K-12 education, childcare, and so on.
Manchin also claimed he’s worried about the impact of the latest COVID surge on the economy. But if COVID slows the economy, that’s even more justification for federal spending that strengthens social safety nets. And even more reason to support a program that could possibly stimulate the economy in the short run.
He said he can’t face his constituents in West Virginia without renouncing “Build Back Better.”But on a per-person basis, West Virginians would be among the biggest beneficiaries of the legislation in all America. One out of four West Virginians over 65 have no natural teeth, for example — the highest rate in the nation. Biden’s original bill provided dental benefits under Medicare.
So what’s really motivating Manchin? Four possibilities:
West Virginia is a coal state, and Manchin doesn’t want to do anything that might dampen coal production (the bill has a number of environmental measures). Possibly, but Manchin must know there’s no long-term future in mining coal regardless of what happens to this legislation. There are far fewer coal jobs left in West Virginia than there are jobs in health care. The legislation would, however, help West Virginians transition from coal to new and better jobs. And help them survive in the meantime.
He’s self-dealing. He owns stock valued at between $1 million and $5 million in Enersystems, a coal brokerage firm he founded in 1988? Last year he made half a million dollars in Enersystems dividends (roughly three times the $174,000 salary he made last year as a senator).
He’s takes bribes. He collects more campaign money from coal, oil, and gas companies than any other senator. (In June, Exxon lobbyist Keith McCoy told the Greenpeace investigative unit that Manchin participated in weekly meetings with company operatives.)
He loves the power and attention. Who ever heard of Joe Manchin before the Biden administration? A minor-league Democratic senator from a small, poor state suddenly has the national spotlight and has become the biggest spoiler in the Democratic Party.
Are there 17 Republican votes. Maybe. There are five senators who will probably vote to convict, and another 12 who could do so.
The website borntorunthenumbers.com has studied the issue, and here is how they see the possible 17 votes to convict:
Almost Certain to Convict (5)
· Mitt Romney, Utah. The 2012 GOP presidential nominee has become the conscience of the right, often critiquing Trump and the only GOP vote to impeach in 2019. Plus he is solid in Utah, where Trump is not terribly popular, and is not up for reelection until 2024.
· Lisa Murkowski, Alaska. The longstanding thorn in Trump’s side has all but announced she is going to vote to convict.
· Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania. Toomey has announced he will not run for reelection in 2022. Like other Republicans before him who were on the verge of leaving office (see: Jeff Flake), Toomey has broken with Trump and has been openly supportive of impeachment.
· Susan Collins, Maine. Collins just won a surprisingly easy reelection in Maine over a well-funded opponent. She has long been lampooned for her “concern” with Trump, and vilified for her view that Trump had “learned his lesson’ in the Mueller investigation. It is time for her to shore up support from center-left Mainers and translate that concern into a conviction vote.
· Ben Sasse, Nebraska. Sasse has been unsparing of his critiques of Trump throughout the transition, and at times before then, and just won reelection, so he is a near certain conviction vote.
Open to Impeachment and Possibly Waiting for McConnell (12)
We’ve listed these Senators roughly in order of the likelihood they will support impeachment, with all of them more or less contingent on McConnell’s decision.
· Mitch McConnell, Kentucky. The Senate Leader just won his reelection and is concerned about regaining the Senate in 2022, and believes ridding the GOP of Trump is central to its future. He openly supported impeachment and has said he is on the fence about conviction. It is all up to him; if he votes to convict, enough GOP Senators will surely follow to get to 17. If he does not, it could be just the five above joining the Democrats.
· John Thune, South Dakota. Thune, the GOP Senate’s number two as Minority Whip, will surely follow McConnell. His claim to anti-Trump fame was memorably calling Trump’s efforts to overturn the Senate’s certification process “would go down like a shot dog.”
· Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia. She has indicated that Trump “owns” the insurrection and that his actions were “inexcusable.” And she was just reelected, so she will not face a threat for six years.
· John Cornyn, Texas. Cornyn just won reelection, and is widely known to hold Trump in utter contempt, and has broken with him on a few issues, notably the Wall, COVID and foreign policy. He knows Texas is turning purple and Trump has to be ejected as part of a GOP reinvention for him to survive there.
· Thom Tillis, North Carolina. Tillis just won a second-term in a close one in a purple state, and he’ll need a conviction vote to win again in 2026 in his state.
· Richard Burr, North Carolina. Burr has decided that he will not run for reelection in 2022. Like Toomey, he thus faces no electoral consequences for a conviction vote. He ran the Senate Intelligence Committee with surprising dignity in the Trump years.
· Jim Inhofe, Oklahoma. The Chair of the Armed Services Committee – succeeding John McCain – was furious over Trump’s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act. Trump was unhappy with the lack of provisions relating to social media and protections for military bases named for Confederate generals – and Inhofe was incensed Trump would veto legislation that had passed routinely for 60 consecutive years. He was just reelected and amply protected if he chooses to vote to convict.
· Mike Lee, Utah. Lee was surprisingly forceful in opposing Trump’s attempts to upend the certification process, especially since he has been a long-time ally of one of the ringleaders of the movement, Ted Cruz.
· Rob Portman, Ohio. Portman passes for a moderate these days in the GOP, and occasionally exhibits modest pangs of conscience with respect to Trump. He will likely convict with McConnell providing him cover, but it will be a tough one since he is up for reelection in 2022.
· Chuck Grassley, Iowa. The GOP Senate’s elder statesmen (at age 89) has been highly critical of Trump’s actions with respect to the insurrection, declaring that Trump has already disqualified himself. But he is up for reelection in 2022, and, despite his age, just may do it. And Iowa is becoming redder every election.
· Deb Fischer, Nebraska. Fischer is the quieter of the Nebraska Senators relative to Ben Sasse, but she issued a strong statement in support of the Biden certification, has been silent on the impeachment and thus appears to be open to the Senate process.
· Tom Cotton, Arkansas. Cotton, a deeply conservative Trump supporter, has 2024 presidential aspirations and already he has chosen a different path than his neighbor and fellow potential contender, Josh Hawley. Cotton chose to oppose Hawley in the certification battle, supporting Biden, and he may play his hand all the way with a conviction vote, which also helps him to clear the 2024 field of Trump. It’s a huge gamble for the young Arkansas Senator.
They want the votes overturned in Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nevada. Why? Because those states voted for a Democrat to be president. That has to be the reason, because no evidence exists of fraudulent voting or an election rigging (as Trump has repeatedly lied about).
Republicans now seem to think they have a right to rule, regardless of what the voters want. They don't want Democratic votes to even be counted -- and they have gone to great lengths to suppress those votes.
Here's how Jamelle Bouie puts it in a New York Times column:
Of the many stories to tell about American politics since the end of the Cold War, one of growing significance is how the Republican Party came to believe in its singular legitimacy as a political actor. Whether it’s a hangover from the heady days of the Reagan revolution (when conservatives could claim ideological hegemony) or something downstream of America’s reactionary traditions, it’s a belief that now dominates conservative politics and has placed much of the Republican Party in opposition to republican government itself.
It’s a story of escalation, from the relentless obstruction of the Gingrich era to the effort to impeach Bill Clinton to the attempt to nullify the presidency of Barack Obama and on to the struggle, however doomed, to keep Joe Biden from ever sitting in the White House as president. It also goes beyond national politics. In 2016, after a Democrat, Roy Cooper, defeated the Republican incumbent Pat McCrory for the governorship of North Carolina, the state’s Republican legislature promptly stripped the office of power and authority. Wisconsin Republicans did the same in 2018 after Tony Evers unseated Scott Walker in his bid for a third term. And Michigan Republicans took similar steps against another Democrat, Gretchen Whitmer, after her successful race for the governor’s mansion.
Considered in the context of a 30-year assault on the legitimacy of Democratic leaders and Democratic constituencies (of which Republican-led voter suppression is an important part), the present attempt to disrupt and derail the certification of electoral votes is but the next step, in which Republicans say, outright, that a Democrat has no right to hold power and try to make that reality. The next Democrat to win the White House — whether it’s Biden getting re-elected or someone else winning for the first time — will almost certainly face the same flood of accusations, challenges and lawsuits, on the same false grounds of “fraud.”
It’s worth emphasizing the bad faith and dishonesty on display here. At least 140 House Republicans say that they will vote againstcounting certain electoral votes on Wednesday. Among them are newly seated lawmakers in Georgia and Pennsylvania, two states whose votes are in contention. But the logic of their objection applies to them as well as Biden. If his state victories are potentially illegitimate, then so are theirs. Or take the charge, from Ted Cruz and 10 other Senate Republicans, that multiple key swing states changed (or even violated) their election laws in contravention of the Constitution. If it’s true for those cases, then it’s also true of Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, unilaterally expanded voting, however meagerly. And yet there’s no drive to cancel those results.
The issue for Republicans is not election integrity, it’s the fact that Democratic votes count at all.
The call lasted about an hour, and was shocking to say the least. It was probably also criminal -- marking the first time any president has tried to illegally change votes to keep himself in power.
You can go here to read the full transcript of the call, and I suggest you do so. It will make clear just how crazy Donald Trump actually is -- and how criminal he is in his attempt to remain in power.
Here's part of what Rick Hasen had to say about the call at Slate.com:
President Donald Trump likely broke both federal and state law in a Saturday phone call during which he encouraged Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn the state’s election results. The president certainly committed an impeachable offense that is grounds for removing him from the office he will be vacating in less than three weeks, or disqualifying him from future elected office. His tumultuous term will end as it began, with questions as to the legality of conduct connected to manipulating American elections, and a defense based squarely on the idea that Trump’s mind is so warped that he actually believes the nonsense he spews. Trump may never be put on trial for what he did, but a failure to prosecute him may lead to a further deterioration of American democracy. . . .
This request is easily the kind of corrupt conduct that could serve as a “high crime and misdemeanor” subjecting him to removal from office, though with his departure imminent it seems unlikely that Congress would take up the case. The conduct, though, is much more egregious than the Ukraine threats that got Trump impeached one year ago, conduct that was also aimed at manipulating the election by pressuring Ukrainian officials to come up with fake dirt on Joe Biden. Trump, of course, also entered office under a cloud of suspicion over his campaign’s links to Russia and Vladimir Putin’s successful efforts to manipulate the 2016 election on his behalf. In the unlikely event that Congress were to make him the first president ever to be impeached twice—impeachments can happen even after elected officials leave office—then he could be disqualified from running for high office again in the future. When not attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, it has been reported that Trump has been planning a possible third run for president in 2024.
Aside from being impeachable conduct, Trump’s actions likely violate federal and Georgia law. A federal statute makes it a crime when one “knowingly and willfully … attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by … the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.” A Georgia statute similarly provides that a “person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.”. . .
Despite the long odds, I would hope at least Georgia prosecutors will consider going after Trump, or that the House of Representatives might impeach him again with the goal of disqualifying from running in 2024. Lack of prosecution or investigation demonstrates that there’s little to deter the next would-be authoritarian—perhaps a more competent one—from trying to steal an election. Trump came a lot closer than he should have this time, and next time we may not be so lucky.
That makes this country a laughingstock among democracies. How can we justify choosing a person who did not get the most votes?
Sadly, the electoral college is built into our Constitution. To eliminate it, we would need a constitutional amendment, and that is very unlikely to happen.
But maybe there is another way to truly become a democracy. There is a movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. This is where states pass a law saying the candidate who got the most popular votes nationally would get the state's electoral college votes (regardless of which candidate won the most votes in that state).
So far, 15 states and the District of Columbia have passed such a law. These are the states (and their electoral votes):
California.....55
Colorado.....9
Connecticut.....7
Delaware.....3
D.C......3
Hawaii.....4
Illinois.....20
Maryland.....10
Massachusetts.....11
New Jersey.....14
New Mexico.....5
New York.....29
Oregon.....7
Rhode Island.....4
Vermont.....3
Washington.....12
But that only adds up to 196 electoral votes. 74 more electoral votes would be needed, so more states need to join in the compact by altering their state law on choosing electors. If they do, then the electoral college vote would be moot, and the popular vote winner would be the president.
We elect every other of our officials by the popular vote. It's time we do the same for the president. Until then, we will not truly be a representative democracy, because the vote of a person in some states will still be more important than the vote of a person in another state. And that's ridiculous!
