New Mexico Bill to Replace "Disobedient" Presidential Electors

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Ballot Access News


Posted on February 16, 2019 by Richard Winger

New Mexico Representative Matthew McQueen (D-Santa Fe) has introduced HB 425. It says if a presidential elector does not vote for his or her party’s presidential nominee, he or she will be replaced. The text of the bill is here. It seems to imply that an independent presidential candidate will never carry New Mexico, because it only deals with party nominees for presidential elector. Here is the legislative analyst’s description of the bill.

Read more: http://ballot-access.org/2019/02/16/new-mexico-bill-to-replace-disobedient-presidential-electors/

---

(Short article, no more at link.)

[groundloop]

1. Better idea - do away with the Electoral College and we won't have to be having these discussions

[Perseus]

5. Yes, that is a better solution

I have asked this before, but I will continue to ask the same question.

Why is it that no one is fighting to get the Electoral College dissolved? I would think that Democrats having lost twice in a very clear way due to the EC, that they would be getting efforts in motion to get rid of the EC.

[Stonepounder]

2. There were two basic reasons for the Electoral College.

1. So the less populous states couldn't be swamped by the super-high population states.
2. So, if the election went to a really bad candidate, the electors could refuse to elect him(her) and vote for someone else.

Our founders weren't stupid. They were aware that it was possible that the voters could get it wrong. The basic premise was that the electors were to be another roadblock to a Trump getting elected. Somehow folks have forgotten (or never knew) about item 2.

(Disclaimer: I never knew about it either, but this is what comes from being married to someone with a PhD in American History.)

[cstanleytech]

3. Unfortunately with Trump the system failed.

[agincourt]

4. It seems to be working the opposite,

of what an enlightenment era thinker would want it to do.

[ToxMarz]

6. The "less populous state" argument is meant to sound benevolent

What it referred to was less white populated (slave states) being overwhelmed by non-slave states. All it was meant to protect was slave ownership by increasing their states voice. Whatever else it did wasn't their motivation. It clearly perfectly aligned with the 3/5's compromise.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

8. Good post ...

... that is exactly what I was taught in junior high, high school and college. Before we toss the EC, lets get the big money out of politics and the selection of electors.

[Dan]

7. And this is why

The Electorial College as envisioned can not work. The parties have corrupted the original intent.

[Capt. America]

9. Reason number 47 to get rid of the electoral college.