Las Vegas News, Sports, Business, Entertainment and Classifieds

Las Vegas Review-Journal - News

Sunday
Mar 14, 2010
Sunny
Sunny 54° Weather Forecast

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

sponsored by
News


Assembly backs bill to bypass Electoral College

CARSON CITY -- On a party line vote, the Assembly backed a bill Tuesday that would lead to the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide always winning the presidential election.

All 27 Democrats backed Assembly Bill 413, while all 14 Republicans opposed it. Assemblywoman Bonnie Parnell, D-Carson City, was absent.


Most Popular Stories
  1. Experts: Dangers await Las Vegas if city fires, rehires workers
  2. San Diego State defeats Rebels 55-45 for title; UNLV waits for NCAA bid
  3. Pilot dies when small plane crashes near Boulder City Airport
  4. Gibbons signs budget bill; lawsuits filed to block state from taking water funds
  5. County tax revenue loss grows due to record number of appeals
  6. UNLV TOPS BYU IN MOUNTAIN WEST SEMIFINAL
  7. Hearts may swoon when stocks do
  8. Lawsuits filed to block state from taking water funds
  9. Hepatitis C fight consumes patients
  10. 'Dice' miffed over 'Donny Clay' show




Under the bill, the five presidential electors from Nevada would be required to cast votes for the presidential candidate with the most votes nationally, even if that candidate does not receive the most votes in Nevada.

The National Popular Vote organization has been plugging the plan in states around the country.

The bill provides a way for states to circumvent the constitutionally required Electoral College where 538 electors actually choose the president.

The electors base their choices on the candidate who wins the most votes in their states, although occasionally they have voted for other candidates.

The National Popular Vote plan would not go into effect until states with more than half of the electoral votes nationally approve its provisions.

So far, four states with 23 percent of the 270 electors needed to select the president have approved the National Popular Vote plan.

If the plan had been in effect in 2000, then Democrat Al Gore would have defeated Republican George W. Bush in the presidential election. Gore drew 545,000 more votes nationwide than Bush.

But Bush received 271 electoral votes, compared to Gore's 268, and won the election after the U.S. Supreme Court ended a recount in Florida.

In three previous presidential elections, the candidate with fewer direct votes also won the presidency.

Assemblyman Jerry Claborn, D-Las Vegas, said a Galllup poll earlier this year found 72 percent of Nevadans favor the election of the president by the direct vote of the people.

Republicans expressed opposition on the grounds that if there is a direct election of the president, then less populated states like Nevada won't be visited by presidential candidates.

"If this measure passes, then there is no use for states like Nevada," said Assemblyman John Carpenter, R-Elko. "New York, California, Texas and Florida will elect the president."

Assembly Minority Leader Heidi Gansert, R-Reno, echoed his comments, noting that in the last election Nevada received many visits from presidential candidates because they wanted the state's electoral votes.

Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, a retired high school teacher, said he is troubled by the Electoral College and thinks the National Popular Vote move could put pressure on Congress to seek an amendment to abolish it.

"The Electoral College is not working and has not worked for some time," said Anderson, D-Sparks. "We are no longer riding around on horses. All the people of the United States should vote for the president."

The bill now goes to the Senate where the Democrats hold a 12-9 edge. With Senate approval, it would be forwarded to Republican Gov. Jim Gibbons.

Daniel Burns, Gibbons' communications director, said the governor will decide to veto or sign the bill once he sees the final language of an approved bill.

Burns, however, predicted that within a few years citizens will be able to elect the president over the Internet.

Contact Capital Bureau Chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Leave Your Comment 9 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Current Word Count:

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

Report abuse

M wrote on April 23, 2009 06:05 PM: My vote in 2010 is all I need to express my outrage at this horrendous bill.


Report abuse

Kelly wrote on April 22, 2009 11:12 AM: I am horrified that Nevada legislators would volutarily choose to subjugate the voice of Nevadans to those of more populous states. Nevada has always had an independant spirit & we should have the right to vote as we, Nevadans, see fit......not just blindly follow the crowd.

This bill is offensive and an affront to anyone who values freedom and liberty.

I sincerely hope that the Senate has enough integrity to soundly defeat it.


Report abuse

this would have hurt the mormons in the 1800's wrote on April 22, 2009 10:43 AM:
when the mormons decided to take the whole western half of the united states and call it the great state of deseret.
abe lincoln said no, but mormons decided that because they have the most electoral votes. they should keep the deseret territory.
nevada became a state and is known as battle born state because of this by lincoln to stop the desire by mormons to take what ever they feel like.
abe lincoln was first president to check out book of mormon from the library, and found it to be a total story of fiction

ever wonder why they call it deseret industries ?

the whole giant fraud costs everyone

check into for yourself,the great state of deseret was montana and all the way from canada, down to san diego beach and everything west of there

no greed to see here folks


Report abuse

George Roberts wrote on April 22, 2009 10:14 AM: Don't let America fall under mob rule. And that's exactly what this proposal is all about. America is a constitutional republic, with elected representatives. We should keep it that way. The States need to be free to pick their own presidential electors, and those electors need to be free to chose their preferred candidate. The States that want to tie their elector's hands by requiring them to cast their ballots for the presidential candidate who received the most votes within that State have already done so. This measure would simply enslave the States to the country wide mob. Why should the electors from Montana be required to cast their ballots for a particular candidate just because that candidate won huge majorities of the votes in Los Angeles and New York City? That's not right, and it's not the American way.


Report abuse

JohnnyD wrote on April 22, 2009 09:07 AM: Tom Jefferson, most of us made our points yesterday when it was announced on the RJ's web site. And we definitely made our comments known.

And Tom, the fact is that we do not vote for the president. Our electors actually do the voting. Technically, they can vote for anyone they want, however, they've voted for those candidates that reflects the state's popular vote.

As someone who wrote the Constitution,I thought you would know that.


Report abuse

Tom Jefferson wrote on April 22, 2009 07:55 AM: I can't believe this isn't a more prominent story, nor that two-thirds of our Assembly has such a poor understanding of what "state sovereignty" means.

Does any politician even bother reading the Constitution anymore? Apparently 72% of Nevada pollees don't.

This quote makes absolutely no sense:
"We are no longer riding around on horses. All the people of the United States should vote for the president."

All the people of the United STATES (not federal districts nor territories) DO vote for the president. Actually, they vote for a two-person ticket consisting of a presidential and a vice-presidential candidate, but that's not really the issue. The Constitution couldn't be clearer about how the chief executive is elected. But Tony's right- "Why vote?"

The fact that NORM!'s column received more comments than this story tells you all you need to know about the direction this country is heading in.


Report abuse

Tony wrote on April 22, 2009 07:27 AM: Why vote?


Report abuse

States'_Rights wrote on April 22, 2009 07:08 AM: The electors base their choices on the candidate who wins the most votes in their states

The major political parties have really corrupted the process. Nowadays, electors are party hacks who, 99.8% of the time, rubber-stamp their Party's nominee. Democrat electors vote for Obama, Republicans McCain, and so forth. That is not original intent.

Electors were supposed to be men selected by their respective state legislatures, who would sort of caucus, use their good judgement, and vote (for President and VP) for someone who would respect the interests of their STATE. Nevada's interests are probably not the same as New York's, you see. The interests of the major political parties are, well, the results speak for themselves.

Nevada should change to the "long ballot", whereby voters choose electors directly. Sort of the way Louisiana does it. We would each vote for five electors, who are not necessarily pledged to a particular candidate. I would only vote for electors who self-identified as small government. If you wanted big government, you could vote for electors identified as Democrat, Republican, or Socialist Party members.


Report abuse

ia wrote on April 22, 2009 06:16 AM: The Democrats have done in 100 days what the Republicans have tried for 8 years…

Make the Republicans look good.