Can the Electoral College Vote Against Their State
State Control of Electors
There is no federal police force that requires electors to vote every bit they have pledged, but 29 states and the District of Columbia have legal control over how their electors vote in the Balloter College. This means their electors are leap past country constabulary and/or by state or party pledge to cast their vote for the candidate that wins the statewide pop vote. At the aforementioned time, this also means that in that location are 21 states in the union that take no requirements of, or legal control over, their electors. Therefore, despite the consequence of a state'south pop vote, the land's electors are ultimately complimentary to vote in whatever style they please, including an abstention, with no legal repercussions. Us with legal command over their electors are the following 29 and D.C.:
Alabama (Code of Ala. §17-19-2)
Alaska (Alaska Stat. §15.30.090)
California (Ballot Code §6906)
Colorado (CRS §1-4-304)
Connecticut (Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-176)
Delaware (xv Del C §4303)
District of Columbia (§1-1312(grand))
Florida (Fla. Stat. §103.021(1))
Hawaii (HRS §14-28)
Maine (21-A MRS §805)
Maryland (Md Ann Code art 33, §8-505)
Massachusetts (MGL, ch. 53, §8)
Michigan (MCL §168.47)
Mississippi (Miss Lawmaking Ann §23-xv-785)
Montana (MCA §13-25-104)
Nebraska (§32-714)
Nevada (NRS §298.050)
New Mexico (NM Stat Ann §i-15-nine)
North Carolina (NC Gen Stat §163-212)
Ohio (ORC Ann §3505.40)
Oklahoma (26 Okl St §10-102)
Oregon (ORS §248.355)
S Carolina (SC Code Ann §seven-19-80)
Tennessee (Tenn Code Ann §2-15-104(c))
Utah (Utah Code Ann §20A-thirteen-304)
Vermont (17 VSA §2732)
Virginia (§24.two-203)
Washington (RCW §29.71.020)
Wisconsin (Wis Stat §7.75)
Wyoming (Wyo Stat §22-xix-108)
Most of these state laws by and large assert that an elector shall cast his or her vote for the candidates who won a bulk of the state'due south popular vote, or for the candidate of the party that nominated the elector.
Over the years, withal, despite legal oversight, a number of electors have violated their state's law binding them to their pledged vote. However, these violators ofttimes only face up beingness charged with a misdemeanor or a minor fine, commonly $ane,000. Many constitutional scholars concur that electors remain free agents despite state laws and that, if challenged, such laws would be ruled unconstitutional. Therefore, electors can decline to cast their vote for a specific candidate (the one that wins the popular vote of their state), either voting for an alternative candidate, or abstaining completely. In fact, in the 2000 election, Barbara Lett-Simmons, an elector for the District of Columbia, bandage a blank ballot for president and vice president in protestation of the District'south unfair voting rights. Indeed, when it comes down to information technology, electors are ultimately costless to vote for whom they personally prefer, despite the general public's want.
Electoral College Tabular array of Contents
July 13th 2009
Boundness of U.South. democracy
Indianapolis Star
FairVote research is cited in back up of the National Pop Vote plan in Indiana, because "every vote bandage for president should exist equally important and equally coveted, whether it originates in California, Connecticut or Crawfordsville."
July 9th 2009
Winner-take-all tin elect a second-place president
San Diego Union-Tribune
The founder of National Pop Vote lays out the shortcomings and injustices of the Electoral College organisation, and shows why the National Popular Vote plan is the right solution.
May 14th 2009
Let's Make Every Vote Count
The Nation
Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the Nation magazine, highlights FairVote's research in an important piece on the "broad support" growing in u.s.a. for the National Pop Vote plan to elect the president.
[ Next ]
Source: http://archive.fairvote.org/?page=967
0 Response to "Can the Electoral College Vote Against Their State"
Post a Comment