National Popular Vote Gains Ground

Will This Be What Finally Divides Our Country for Good?

A Constitutional analysis of the dangers of the National Popular Vote legislation. We are not a Democracy, we are a Republic! We always strive to bring you Conservative Constitutional context to today’s issues. With so much confusion, it’s important that you understand what the Constitution says so the left can’t deceive you. We provide practical ways to fight back using the systems we have in place today, while we strive to return to the Constitutional Republic that our forefathers envisioned.

Constitutional Alert!

On May 21, 2019, the Nevada Senate passed the National Popular Vote bill 12-8, and sent the bill to the office of Governor Steve Sisolak. On May 30, 2019, Governor Steve Sisolak thankfully vetoed the National Popular Vote bill (status of AB186). It was a close one

Recently however, Colorado, New Mexico, Delaware, and Connecticut have now been added to this list of those who have passed the bill into law. If you think this is just going to go away, it isn’t. This legislation is gaining ground around the country, and it’s important that you understand what it is and the threat it poses.

This legislation is gaining ground in Nevada, Maine, Minnesota, Oregon, Michigan, Arizona, and even Oklahoma. The group National Popular Vote is very deceptive however. They use outright fake endorsements and out-of-context snippets of video interviews to try to show support for their cause. They also have a “Myth” series of videos that are just wrong on every level. But, they are pulling out all stops in their “win at all costs” method.

What is this National Popular Vote Legislation?

Article 2 section 2 clauses 2 and 3 and the Twelfth Amendment of the US Constitution require States to establish electors that will choose the president and vice president of the United States.

Is Biden the ultimate embarrassment to our country?*

This poll gives you free access to your premium politics email newsletter. Subscribe at any time.

According to the group National Popular Vote:
The National Popular Vote interstate compact would not take effect until enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). Under the compact, the national popular vote winner would be the candidate who received the most popular votes from all 50 states (and DC) on Election Day. When the Electoral College meets in mid-December, the national popular vote winner would receive all of the electoral votes of the enacting states, and therefore become the president-elect.

The reason for this legislation is clear. The Democrats are upset that the last two Republican President’s were elected by electoral votes, not popular vote.

They want a pure democracy, not a Constitutional Republic, and seek to continue to undermine it. Make no mistake, if this legislation reaches it’s goal by bringing in enough states, our Republic will cease to exist.

One of the interesting takeaways to me when comparing this to other situations, is that they throw a monkey wrench into the system, then claim it doesn’t work, and provide a nice new “modern” solution to fix it.

Let’s take capitalism as an example. They undermine fair and free trade. They allow monopolies to dominate. They saddle it with the heavy burdens of over-regulation and excessive taxes, much like they did during the Obama years. Then….”see, it doesn’t work.” We need a new system. Trump put a monkey wrench of his own in this particular plan by reversing many of those things, but not all, as he has unleashed our economy.

They do the same thing with the Constitution. Both parties have undermined the Constitution for decades. They have gotten so far away from it now that it is hardly identifiable. Yet, they blame the Constitution for the country’s shortcomings. Again, they say, “see, it doesn’t work. Time for a new modern approach”.

Many of the problems that we see with the citizenry is a lack of education about the Constitution and our governmental system. We can certainly lay plenty of blame at the feet of our federalized educational system, which seeks to promote federalism and suppress state’s rights, among many other things.

They simply do not teach much, if any, about the Constitution, it’s history, or it’s importance as it relates to governmental affairs, and virtually nothing about the supremacy of the states.

Routinely, media, politicians, educators, etc., from all sides, continually refer to our country as a “Democracy” instead of a “Republic”. There may be some similarities, but there are also great distinctions. I’m not going to get into all of those today, but these continual references confuse everyone, especially the uneducated.

Thinking they live in a Democracy, even a good number of elected officials think that the popular vote makes sense, after all we live in a Democracy right?

Personally, I think the Democrat leadership definitely knows the difference, but they are playing to the ignorance of people to gain more control and continue to undermine the Constitution in bits and pieces until it effectively, no longer exists. Whether the Republicans that are said to support this understand the difference or not, needs to be questioned as well.

It’s not just Democrats subverting our Constitution.

According to National Popular Vote, ” It has been enacted into law in 15 jurisdictions with 189 electoral votes (CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NM, NY, RI, VT, WA). The bill will take effect when enacted by states with 81 more electoral votes. The bill has passed one house in 9 additional states with 82 electoral votes (AR, AZ, ME, MI, MN, NC, NV, OK, OR), including a 40–16 vote in the Republican-controlled Arizona House and a 28–18 in Republican-controlled Oklahoma Senate, and been approved unanimously by committee votes in two additional Republican-controlled states with 26 electoral votes (GA, MO).”

What is the purpose, and importance, of the Electoral College?

Much of the confusion regarding all of this stems from a lack of knowledge and understanding of the Constitution, the powers of the “Several States”, and the role of the Federal government (and it’s three branches).

The Federal Government is a creation of the States, through a contract signed by those states ( the Constitution) to perform limited tasks. Ultimate power is supposed to rest with the people via the representation by their respective States.

The Electoral College is designed to ensure that the voices of their people, and thus their state, is represented in the federal government.

The President is not supposed to be a king, nor is his purpose to represent “all American’s”, rather he is supposed to represent all states.

“The process of the electoral college was established to ensure that the person elected to be president of these United States would accurately represent the union as a whole, not favoring certain States while ignoring others.

The office of president, contrary to popular belief, was never designed to be a representative of individual citizens, but rather a representative of the collective interests of the States.

A survey of the powers delegated to the president via Article 2 of the Constitution makes the role of the president quite clear.

He is not the “leader of America,” he is the leader of the military upon declaration of war by Congress. He is part of the treaty process that makes contractual agreements with foreign governments and the States.

Most everything that the president is to do, he does only with the consent of the Senate (the voice of the States). Together, the President and the Senate ensure that each State’s interests are represented equally in matters of war, peace, and foreign commerce.

The office of the president was established to be the voice to foreign countries on behalf of the collective States. Because he is the representative of the States, the electors of the State are to choose their president based upon the person they believe will best represent the principles and interests of their State.” KrisAnne Hall, Constitutional Attorney and Educator

As a Constitutional Republic, also sometimes referred to as a “representative democracy”, we the people, elect our state representatives, and our state representatives elect the President. To be clear, we are NOT A DEMOCRACY, we are a REPUBLIC.

The roles of the President, State, and Federal Governments are important to understand

The President is not supposed to be a representative of the “people” but rather a representative of the “states” in matters of foreign treaties and war.

The power and importance of the State is suppose to reign supreme to that of the federal government. This was in large part what the civil war was fought over, the supremacy of the state.

Certainly since the civil war, which could be looked at as a war between the states and the federal government, we have seen the “federalization” of the country. Less and less power to the states, close to where the people reside, and more power given to the federal government far from the people.

Without getting into the weeds too far; The Constitution was designed to keep the power close to home. It is much easier to effect change on a local and state level than it is on a national level. Being a geographically and culturally diverse country, policies that are good for one locality and state, may not be the best solution for another.

Yet, we have gravitated to centralizing all of our power federally. Even worse, we have continued to gravitate federal authority to one branch, The President, much like a king, but only for a term.

We have had a fascination with kingship since the dawn of time it seems. George Washington, fresh out of the revolution and into the country’s first presidency, gave voice to this concern. The people, even then, had a desire to make Washington “king”.

He rebuked this, thankfully, and recommended term limits for POTUS, stressing the importance of the peaceful transition of power. Still today, we oogle at anything having to do with the royal family in England. Fans line up, track every movement, and read every headline. I think you get the point.

This all has to do with that misconception and misapplication of federal authority and the role of the President from the very start. It has to do with a lack of understanding of the Constitution and the power of the states.

We want a king that will represent the people in a democracy, but only for a term or two.

The founders knew that pure democracies do not work. That’s been proven throughout history. The fluidity, and constant change, of a democracy is unstable by it’s very nature, and “ruling by a majority” leaves many voices unheard, unrepresented, and their rights, as protected by the Constitution, squashed in favor of whatever the ruling majority wants on that particular day. This most certainly leads to constant chaos. Thinking that a President is there to represent us specifically as American’s and not the state’s, and their authority, subverts that power.

If we abandon all the representative principals listed above, and the dominant power of “the several states”, in favor of a pure democracy, then we have a kingship, a monarchy. We might as well do away with the other branches of government all together. I guess if you follow the lefts ideology here, they want a democratic king.

Even worse, we might as well disband the state, and local government, as well. This trend is already happening. So many come out to vote in federal elections, but most people don’t even know who their state and local representatives are.

These are the people designed to hold the most power and influence over your daily life. The power structure is designed to keep it close to home, so that if you don’t like it, you can more easily change it. But, we are giving that away to federalization, monarchs, and oligarchs on the federal level.

People are blaming an outdated, and ineffective, Constitution as the reason for chaos and misrepresentations or under representation. In fact, it’s our divergence from the Constitution that has caused these problems. Create a problem, fix a problem with a new “modern solution“, remember?

“…the national popular vote movement takes us even farther away from our Constitutional structure by further removing the independence of the States, and eliminating the voice of the people within those states.

This legislation proposes… each elector of the State must choose the person elected by [national]popular vote regardless of the collective choice of his fellow State citizens.

This legislation mandates that each State submit to the popular choice, regardless of whether that candidate best represents the interests and principles of the people of that State.

Through popular vote, the individual States would become completely irrelevant in the processes of the federal government. The president would no longer be required to ensure all States’ interests were represented in matters of foreign affairs.

The president’s only concern, throughout the entire four years of his terms, would be to make sure the select few States, with the greatest voting population, were happy and pleased with the execution of his power.

It would be like Georgia surrendering all its voice to New York and legislating themselves out of the political process or like Connecticut asking Texas to decide what is in the best interest of Connecticut.” KrisAnne Hall

It’s important to make the distinction that submitting to the popular vote means submitting to the “national popular vote”, not the popular vote in your state.

This kind of misrepresentation would lead to only more misrepresentation, and eliminate the protections put in placed for the minority vote, which right now is about 49% of the voting public, but also could be the majority of the states, especially smaller ones,  being ruled a few. It’s adding to a problem, not fixing it.

The only way to truly fix the issues that we have in our country is to return to the constitutional principals of its founding, not continue to move farther away from it.

I think history should prove that as we have moved farther away, we only seem to have created more problems. But, to know that, you would need to know something about the Constitution. Maybe that is why it’s not being taught. It’s all part of the plan and a lack of education, knowledge, and history are even making some so called conservatives fall for this nonsense.

According to the National Popular Vote, they claim that their purpose for this is legislation, is the very problem, that they will only make worse, with this legislation.

They also cite the lack of presidential campaigns going to certain states as a reason for their legislation. According to them, candidates don’t go to certain states because the number of electoral votes is not significant enough for them to bother with, thus leading to a lack of representation.

First, we have to exclude the principals above that the President is not intended to directly represent the people for a moment. Even in doing so, it is clear that their thought process is flawed and incomprehensive. They focus on certain facts and ignore others, and their plan would lead to presidential candidates going to even fewer states. In fact, you would just need to hit a few major cities.

Sure, this does happen to some degree. Battle ground states get much more attention. But they lump in states like California in their example when everyone already knows that they are a steadfast and stable blue state. Neither candidate would need to go there to secure that vote.

They also ignore the fact that Donald Trump won the election in 2016 by focusing on states that Hillary deemed “electorally insignificant”. So, Trump actually did the very thing that they say doesn’t happen because of our system, yet they ignore it. Hillary ignored it too, and lost!

In essence, the example above demonstrates that those number of states, that Hillary deemed insignificant, would not have representation under this legislative plan. Now, they do.

To truly “Make America Great Again”, we must return to the principals of our founders and the constitution that was drafted by them, not continue to stray from it. The farther we diverge from it, the more problems we have as a country. If only people knew history, they would know the truth of that statement.

Whether it is ignorance or subversion, we expect the radical socialists left to be doing these things, but this same ignorance, and possible subversion, is also drawing in so called GOP members.

According to the National Popular Vote

“National Popular Vote’s Advisory Board includes former Senators Jake Garn (R–UT), Birch Bayh (D–IN), and David Durenberger (R–MN); former Congressmen John Anderson (R–IL, I), John Buchanan (R–AL), Tom Campbell (R–CA), and Tom Downey (D–NY). Other supporters include former Cong. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Governor Howard Dean (D–VT), Governor Jim Edgar (R–IL), and House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA).”

Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that these people agree with them. They could be “advising” them not to do it, but the National Popular Vote does certainly seem to push these names as if they are behind them on this legislation.

Obviously, other more conservative representatives must be coming onboard in order to get this legislation through various state houses. It would be a fairly exhausting research project to investigate and name each representative from each state from a local level that has signed onto this.

As the popularity of this legislation grows, it has caught the eye of the Congressional representatives who have now written bills to abolish the Electoral College altogether. So, you can see all this is just an “innocent” stepping stone anyway.

Charles Cotesworth Pickney, delegate to the Constitutional Convention summed it up this way…

Charles Cotesworth Pickney, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, summed up what was not only the popular belief of the delegates, but would also become the controlling belief in establishing Article 2 section 1 clauses 2 and 3 of the Constitution. He classified a national popular vote of the president to be “liable to the most obvious & striking objections.” He said if the people were to elect the president by popular vote, “They will be led by a few active & designing men. The most populous States by combining in favor of the same individual will be able to carry their points.”

I suppose the question that remains is whether or not we wish to be ruled by a few populous states? Do we wish for the pervasive ignorance of NYC and LA to rule the entirety of the rest of the country? Do we want the chaos that comes from “democracy”?

Of course the left, as it always does, creates a problem that needs fixing and oversimplifies a solution to the problem that they have created, all in an attempt to continue to subvert our Constitution, and the Republic, in an effort to install their own form of government and economic systems. It’s a subversive plan being enacted under the guise of “political ignorance”. They know exactly what they are doing. They just hope you don’t!

These divisions in the idea of the very nature of our governmental form could very well be the final nail in the coffin, of a terribly divided country, that ultimately rips us apart.

This must be stopped! Do not ignore this issue. It is not going away! If this legislation is enacted, you can kiss your Republic good-bye!

Support the New Right Network! They are working hard to bring together conservative voices in one place for you!

Check Out All The Ways To Follow Patriot Resource Center!

From YouTube to all your favorite social media platforms, there are plenty of way to follow us!

Sources referenced:

Author Profile

Crash Gilliam
Crash Gilliam
Crash Gilliam is a contributing author for NRN and Editor-in-Chief for From a poor childhood, Gilliam has experienced a diverse life in construction, private investigations, law enforcement, and aviation as a multi-million dollar business owner. He uses his diverse background to bring you a Conservative approach and constitutional context to stories, and issues, by going “Beyond the Headlines” to bring you the whole truth!