By Luther Weeks on February 9, 2020
There is a lot of lessons that could be learned from Iowa. Yet we may not learn them. On the other hand we may learn other lessons. In no particular order:
- Bernie and Pete both won…
- Change anything in the rules, and the result is likely to have been different…
- People tend to tout their favorite reform as a cure for any crisis….
The bottom line: Be careful what you ask for, the cure may be worse than the disease. Its complicated. Don’t let a crisis go to waste, but avoid knee-jerk solutions.
“‘It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” – Mark Twain
Posted in CT, HowDoWeKnow, Instant Runoff Voting, National, National Popular Vote, NonScienceNonsense, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on November 14, 2019
In the hypothetical that all states agreed to the compact, Aram thinks some election reforms would be in order:
“One of the things that I think should be done, that would need to be done, after enough states sign onto this but before it goes into effect – there should be some standardization of the balloting process, and the counting process, so we can get a reliable national tally.”..
“I’ve advocated for states to adopt this idea, but defer implementation until say 2032. So, Florida would adopt it today, but say ‘our adoption takes effect when you get to 270, but no earlier than 2032,” Amar said. “That would both give Congress time, in the meanwhile, to iron out any logistical wrinkles of the kind that you just mentioned. And it would also defuse the wrongheaded, but persistent, assumption that some people have that this is going to help one political party and hurt the other.”
Unfortunately, his recommendations do not go far enough to cure the problem he now recognizes..
Posted in National, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on March 22, 2018
On Monday we testified against the National Popular Vote Compact. We have been testifying against it since it was first proposed in Connecticut in 2007. There are two companion bills, you can link to them from our testimony. We have been saying pretty much the same things for the last several years. Each year we hone our testimony a bit and listen to new and predominant arguments from the proponents and make small adjustments.
As I have said many times, most of the democrats (and my friends) who support the Compact are wrong. And most of the Republicans opposed, are opposed for the wrong reason. Unlike the National “Experts” that fly in each year to testify, I provide complete testimony with facts that they have not successfully disputed since 2007.
Posted in CT, National, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on May 19, 2017
It is rare that a bill is debated that has insufficient majority caucus support to pass.
[Speaker] Aresimowicz said he’s heard from his constituents that they want the issue debated.“I’m saying let’s at least hear it out and have the discussion,” Aresimowicz said Thursday morning during a press conference in his office before the House debated the bill.
House Majority Leader Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said he expects the vote to be close and it’s unclear what will happen.
Here, we disagree with both sides. We do not buy the Republican arguments against nor the Democratic arguments for the bill. We would support a sufficient Constitutional Amendment. The Compact approach is dangerous making, a flawed system worse. It will lead to increased voter suppression and skulduggery.v
Posted in CT, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on April 6, 2017
Tuesday 
I participated in a forum/debate on the National Popular Vote Compact. Greenwich Time has a vary fair article on the event <read>
In one of the photos I am holding a 1118 page book that is free. Instead, I recommend two books that are shorter, that are worth reading, and worth much more than you will pay for them!
I also have some comments on the uniqueness of an event where individuals claim that Connecticut voters would appreciate more money in politics.
Posted in CT, National, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on February 23, 2017
Yesterday, we testified on several bills, submitting three packages of written testimony. Most of the bills were proposals for the National Popular Vote Compact. We half agree with those testifying for the Compact and half disagree. We would be in favor of a National Popular Vote with a sufficient Constitutional Amendment. We oppose the Compact. Its misfit with our presidential election laws portent chaos.
Posted in CT, CT Law, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on November 11, 2016
Once again, we have an election where it is alleged that the losing candidate won the popular vote. Understandably we have calls from her supporters to abolish the Electoral College by means of the National Popular Vote Compact.
Once again, we must articulate to our friends why this is a bad idea. Once again, we point out to most of those that support the Electoral College that they support it primarily for the wrong reasons.
We have a broken, risky, unequal election system. Cobbling a well-intended compact on top of it makes it more risky, more vulnerable, and the results even less credible:
*****Update 11/16/2016 Pleased to be republished at the CTMirror.
Posted in National, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on August 13, 2016
Donald Trump is visiting Connecticut tonight at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, while Hillary is visiting Greenwich on Monday for a fundraiser <read>
This provides a great opportunity to discuss a couple of points often touted in favor of the National Popular Vote.
- That presidential candidates will never campaign in Connecticut until we have a national popular vote.
- That candidates only come to Connecticut to take money out of the state.
- And apparently we would benefit from the money they would spend here.
Posted in CT, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on April 27, 2014
Retired Justice Stevens has a new book: Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution. We have not read the book, but we have seen Justice Stevens interviewed on NPR and from the table on contents understand the outlines of his six proposed amendments. From the interview he indicated his goal was correcting recent errors of the Court in following the intent of the Founders.
We say he missed a big one. The problems of our electoral system and the Gore v. Bush decision in 2000.
Posted in National, National Popular Vote
By Luther Weeks on April 22, 2014
In a segment last week DemocracyNow editorialized on, interviewed New Yorkers, and representatives of FairVote, on the occasion of New York joining the National Popular Vote Compact/Agreement: Fixing the Electoral College: New York Joins Pact to Elect President by Popular Vote
Unfortunately, their transcript needs at least as much fixing as our current election system. As CTVotersCount readers know, we oppose the Compact because it would make a risky system, much riskier, without providing the claimed benefits. We understand the attraction to many, like nuclear power, fracking, GMOs, and Touch Screen Voting, the national popular vote would seem to be beneficial, yet like those other ideas it has largely unrecognized and unappreciated consequences. For details and background, refer to our recent testimony to the Connecticut Legislature or review our index of past NPV posts..
As a service to our readers, we here provide some annotations to the DemocracyNow transcript, showing where we disagree with the interviewees, and some of the biased comments of the reporters.
Posted in Legislature 2014, National, National Popular Vote
