House Dems Introduce Bill To ‘Abolish Electoral College’

Next up...gun grabbing.
What do ya mean next up?


ekd,mdkd,,xde.png
 

More pandering

Introduced on January 11th and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the resolution proposes an “amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States.”


Authors of the bill include Rep. Cohen, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Rep. Julia Brownley, Peter DeFazio, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, Rep. John Garamendi, and Rep. Jim Cooper.

Before revealing what the constitutional amendment would look like, the bill rebukes the electoral college as created in “an era of limited nationwide communication and information sharing” and resting on “an antiquated theory that citizens will have a better chance of knowing about electors from their home States than about Presidential candidates from out of State”


-------------------- and?

Are you pissed that the article doesn't mention the main purpose ---- Slavery?
 
So what? A Constitutional Amendment requires 2/3 of each chamber to vote in favor as well as 2/3 of states to ratify, so the likelihood of it getting anywhere are slim to none.

All of which has been true for every Amendment ever passed and yet --- there they are.
 

More pandering

Introduced on January 11th and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the resolution proposes an “amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States.”


Authors of the bill include Rep. Cohen, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Rep. Julia Brownley, Peter DeFazio, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, Rep. John Garamendi, and Rep. Jim Cooper.

Before revealing what the constitutional amendment would look like, the bill rebukes the electoral college as created in “an era of limited nationwide communication and information sharing” and resting on “an antiquated theory that citizens will have a better chance of knowing about electors from their home States than about Presidential candidates from out of State”


-------------------- and?

Are you pissed that the article doesn't mention the main purpose ---- Slavery?
Slavery is largely illegal globally because white people ended it, although it still exists it black and brown countries.
 

More pandering

Introduced on January 11th and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the resolution proposes an “amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States.”


Authors of the bill include Rep. Cohen, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Rep. Julia Brownley, Peter DeFazio, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, Rep. John Garamendi, and Rep. Jim Cooper.

Before revealing what the constitutional amendment would look like, the bill rebukes the electoral college as created in “an era of limited nationwide communication and information sharing” and resting on “an antiquated theory that citizens will have a better chance of knowing about electors from their home States than about Presidential candidates from out of State”


more evidence they want to trash the constituion.
Kinda funny thst the only poster that did not lie this post so far is one of USMBs resident paid shills .lol
 

More pandering

Introduced on January 11th and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the resolution proposes an “amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States.”


Authors of the bill include Rep. Cohen, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Rep. Julia Brownley, Peter DeFazio, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, Rep. John Garamendi, and Rep. Jim Cooper.

Before revealing what the constitutional amendment would look like, the bill rebukes the electoral college as created in “an era of limited nationwide communication and information sharing” and resting on “an antiquated theory that citizens will have a better chance of knowing about electors from their home States than about Presidential candidates from out of State”


-------------------- and?

Are you pissed that the article doesn't mention the main purpose ---- Slavery?
Slavery is largely illegal globally because white people ended it, although it still exists it black and brown countries.

Actually slave people ended it.

And it's been illegal here for 155 years, and it was the main impetus for even having the Electoral College.

You'll note that the other, secondary reason articulated above is also way out of date. In the 18th century internet, television, radio, even telegraph didn't exist yet. Traversing the length of the then-country would be a horse-drawn excursion over nonexistent "roads" that would take weeks if not months, meaning few ever did it, and a citizen in, say New Hampshire would know little about candidates from say Georgia That's all changed since then.

The third tertiary reason for the EC was to insert a proxy so that some demagogue charlatan couldn't hoodwink the population into a frenzy. That too has been rendered impotent by so-called "faithless elector" laws which prescribe who electors MUST vote for, and of course the corrupt "winner take all" (WTA) system, which James Madison himself wanted banned even then.

In other words every single reason the Electrical College ever had to exist, has been switched off. LONG ago.

But yanno what, let's just keep running the same system. Because no reasons.
 
Last edited:
So what? A Constitutional Amendment requires 2/3 of each chamber to vote in favor as well as 2/3 of states to ratify, so the likelihood of it getting anywhere are slim to none.

All of which has been true for every Amendment ever passed and yet --- there they are.

Yeah, all whopping 17 after the Bill of Rights in 230 years.
 
So what? A Constitutional Amendment requires 2/3 of each chamber to vote in favor as well as 2/3 of states to ratify, so the likelihood of it getting anywhere are slim to none.

All of which has been true for every Amendment ever passed and yet --- there they are.

Yeah, all whopping 17 after the Bill of Rights in 230 years.

Actually, one of those 17 (the 27th Amendment) was supposed to be part of the original Bill of Rights. It took 202 years to ratify.
 

Forum List

Back
Top