Shhhh…Democrats Quietly Getting The Popular Vote Pact Approved - That's Not Good

Vote Pact is that it is a fundamental misunderstanding of how American government is supposed to work

​Under the cover of the Mainstream Media's 24-7 smokescreen of Trump hatred and Democrats' cries for impeachment, the way we elect our President and Vice President is close to changing radically and no one is talking about it. You may not have heard of the Popular Vote Act, but it is very close to reaching the support required to make it a reality. It’s essentially a Blue States’ effort to hollow out the purpose of the Electoral College without eliminating it and creating a de facto popular vote that will disenfranchise millions of voters and it’s the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of American government and how it’s supposed to work. It’s gaining momentum and could have an impact as early as the 2020 Presidential Election.

What is it?

The Popular Vote Pact is simply a pact between states where each state in the pact pledges all of their electoral votes to the popular vote winner of the Presidential Election. The idea is that when the total of the states in the pact reaches 270 electoral votes they will have a sufficient majority in the Electoral College to automatically choose the President by the national popular vote.

The effort began with the Democrat’s bitterness following the 2000 election as George Bush Defeated Al Gore in the Electoral College by a thin margin. Slowly but surely states have passed this measure in the intervening years, and the pressure on other states has picked up since Donald Trump defeated Hilary Clinton in the Electoral College while losing the popular vote in 2016.

Here is where the effort stands today:

State Year Joined Electoral Votes

California 2011 55

Connecticut 2018 7

District of Columbia 2010 3

Hawaii 2008 4

Illinois 2008 2

Maryland 2007 1

Massachusetts 2010 11

New Jersey 2007 14

New York 2014 29

Rhode Island 2013 4

Vermont 2011 3

Washington 2009 12

TOTAL 172

Needed To Adopt: 270

New Additions:

Delaware (3) House of Representatives awaiting vote and will then pass both Houses.

Colorado (9) - Awaiting Governor’s signature

New Mexico - Awaiting Governor’s signature

189 Electoral Votes

Need 81more pledged electoral votes to reach 270 Majority

As you can see, so far this is a “Who’s Who List” of Blue States. The pact could easily become reality with the addition of Pennsylvania (20), Ohio (18), Minnesota (10), Wisconsin (10), Michigan (16), Virginia (13), Nevada (6), and Oregon (7) that provide more (87) than the additional required (81). Many States are already somewhere in the process of legislation to join the pact.

Some Boring but important background information…

Let me take a minute to remind you of some facts about how the number of electoral votes that each state gets is calculated. It’s simply the correlation between how many federally elected officials each state has. They have 2 Senators plus the number they have in the House of Representatives. The number of Reps your state has is based on your state’s population from the most recent Census (the last one was conducted in 2010).

Now here is where it gets a little tricky. Law sets the electoral votes available at 538. This equals 100 senators and 435 House members plus 3 electoral votes given to the District of Columbia.

After each Census, since the total number of Representatives must remain at 435, the Representatives in the House are reapportioned between the states depending whether or not a state loses or gains population. As a result, additions or subtraction of a state’s electoral votes also occur as well.

Got it so far? Well, I need to tell you something about the Census calculations. A census is conducted of each state’s population every 10 years. The next one will occur in 2020 and Reapportionment will be made in Congress before the 2024 elections, affecting the Electoral College. Population in the census comes from counting ALLof the people in a state, regardless of their immigration status (or non-status).

So what’s really going on with the Popular Vote Pact and why is it a bad thing?

Now the endgame of the “open borders” party becomes very clear, doesn’t it? It’s all about power. Two of the largest Blue States also have the highest undocumented populations (CA and NY) and the next most coveted states, Texas and Florida have very large undocumented populations as well and will certainly flip to Blue in the near future. These immigration policies cynically skew the popular vote and mess with the Electoral College as well.

So if you were trying to derail the Electoral College and also create a huge majority of Democrat voters to advance your social forward legislative agenda, allowing massive migration is a good first step because population is what leads to a growth in a state’s representation in Washington. And, if you wanted to push the Popular Vote Pact over the line, you’d like more Electoral votes in the right places too, right Democrats?

However, the more direct danger of the Popular Vote Pact is that it is a fundamental misunderstanding of how American government is supposed to work and it disenfranchises voters as well. You see, we are not a “democracy” but a democratic republic and there’s a big difference between the two. We do not have “one person - one vote” at the Federal level. Everything was built to protect the minority against the tyranny of the mob, which the majority could easily become.

Our “democracy” comes from our direct election of representatives. Yet we have two houses that make law and must reconcile each piece of legislation. Passing stuff is supposed to be hard to do. In fact, while one body, the House is based on a State’s population, it is evened out in the Senate. Each State, no matter how small their population, has the same amount of Senators (2). Both bodies are equal to each other. This is all about protecting the small from the big states, the minority from the majority.

The Electoral College, when it’s not manipulated through immigration policy, was designed to recognize that each state has a separate culture and social environment and votes together to choose a President. By necessity, each campaign must fit to an individual state’s needs to make its case. So if Pennsylvania voters voted for Trump their electoral votes go to Trump not the national majority winner, Clinton.

California alone accounted for the Clinton Majority in the popular vote in 2016 for goodness sake. Do I really want my vote to be completely blown up by just one state, especially one so outside the mainstream? Why should one large state dominate a national election? Consider this: Hillary Clinton essentially won the Northeast and the West Coast. But there’s a lot of country in between.

Furthermore, in the name of a popular vote, the supporters of the Popular Vote Pact are taking away the vote of individuals. Using my example of 2016, if Pennsylvania was in the pact, my vote and the majority of Pennsylvania voters who voted for Trump would have our vote taken away and our state’s 20 electoral votes would’ve gone to Hillary Clinton instead. But that’s not how we voted!

The Popular Vote Pact is really a sneaky way to avoid taking the Electoral College issues to a national Constitutional Convention, a place where we could actually have a real national debate. Instead, it appears to be a naked power grab by Blue States that is buoyed by Democrat immigration policy. Find out what’s happening in your State and get involved. Write to your state representatives. It's time to bring this thing out into the open and kill it while there's still time.

Jon Saltzman is the Publisher of Political Storm

Sources to explore:

Comments