The Tennessee Republican Party has issued a statement condemning an effort to make the presidential candidate with the most votes the automatic winner of the national election, saying the idea is “a direct assault on our Constitution.”
In a statement issued Monday, the TNGOP said its executive committee had unanimously passed a resolution in support of the current Electoral College system. It rejected something called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which calls on states to award their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who received the most votes nationwide, regardless of the outcome in those states.
The plan would eliminate elections in which the more popular presidential candidate failed to win the electoral college. This can happen when the one candidate’s support is large in a few big states, but the other candidate sweeps the small states. Three presidential candidates have won election this way, all of them Republicans: Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George W. Bush.
Supporters of a national compact, including former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson, say states can switch to a popular vote by simply agreeing with one another to give all of their electoral votes to the national winner. No change to the U.S. Constitution is needed, they say.
But Tennessee Republican Chairman Chris Devaney said in a statement the Electoral College has worked just fine.
“[T]his compact between states is a direct assault on our Constitution and any attempt by other states to improperly influence and usurp another’s rights is blatantly unconstitutional. Our nation is a Constitutional Republic and any attempt to change the electoral process should be done so by a Constitutional Amendment,” said Devaney.
Their complete statement follows:
TNGOP STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY PASSES RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTORAL COLLEGE
NASHVILLE, TN – On Saturday, the State Executive Committee of the Tennessee Republican Party unanimously passed a resolution supporting the constitutional Electoral College process of electing the President of the United States.
“Electing the President of the United States through the Electoral College was the method deemed best by our founding fathers. It ensures that all states, regardless of size, are included in the presidential election process, and it helps to preserve the balance of power between the federal government and state governments,” said Tennessee Republican Party Chairman Chris Devaney.
The resolution reads, in part, “…the Tennessee Republican Party State Executive Committee does fully endorse retaining the constitutionally approved and time-tested Electoral College method of awarding electoral votes to candidates to win the office of President of the United States of America…”
“While some in the National Popular Vote movement have good intentions, this compact between states is a direct assault on our Constitution and any attempt by other states to improperly influence and usurp another’s rights is blatantly unconstitutional. Our nation is a Constitutional Republic and any attempt to change the electoral process should be done so by a Constitutional Amendment,” said Devaney.
This resolution comes in response to a controversial national movement to implement the “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.” The compact would radically change the way we elect the President through a questionable legal maneuver, creating a compact between states that would mandate them to recognize the winner of the national popular vote. The compact needs enough states to equal 270 electoral votes, the number of electoral votes needed to win the Presidency. By changing the rules of Presidential elections via a compact, supporters theoretically could have support from as few as 12 states like California and New York, instead of the normal 38 states needed to amend the Constitution.
The SEC resolution, originally sponsored by State Executive Committee member Nathan James, was passed by a 61-0 vote. Five members were not present. All members voting in favor of the resolution have also been listed as co-sponsors. The move follows a recent resolution passed by the Republican National Committee at its quarterly meeting in Tampa this month. Devaney, along with National Committeeman John Ryder and National Committeewoman Peggy Lambert were original co-sponsors of the RNC resolution.
####
The Tennessee Republican Party has issued a statement condemning an effort to make the presidential candidate with the most votes the automatic winner of the national election, saying the idea is “a direct assault on our Constitution.”
The presidential election system we have today is not in the Constitution, and enacting National Popular Vote would not need an amendment. State-by-state winner-take-all laws to award Electoral College votes, are an example of state laws eventually enacted by states, using their exclusive power to do so, AFTER the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, Now our current system can be changed by state laws again.
Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution– “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . .” The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.”
The constitution does not prohibit any of the methods that were debated and rejected. Indeed, a majority of the states appointed their presidential electors using two of the rejected methods in the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 (i.e., appointment by the legislature and by the governor and his cabinet). Presidential electors were appointed by state legislatures for almost a century.
Neither of the two most important features of the current system of electing the President (namely, universal suffrage, and the 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method) are in the U.S. Constitution. Neither was the choice of the Founders when they went back to their states to organize the nation’s first presidential election.
In 1789, in the nation’s first election, the people had no vote for President in most states, only men who owned a substantial amount of property could vote, and only three states used the state-by-state winner-take-all method to award electoral votes.
The current 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in a particular state) is not entitled to any special deference based on history or the historical meaning of the words in the U.S. Constitution. It is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, the debates of the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. The actions taken by the Founding Fathers make it clear that they never gave their imprimatur to the winner-take-all method.
The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding the state’s electoral votes.
As a result of changes in state laws enacted since 1789, the people have the right to vote for presidential electors in 100% of the states, there are no property requirements for voting in any state, and the state-by-state winner-take-all method is used by 48 of the 50 states. States can, and frequently have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years. Maine and Nebraska do not use the winner-take-all method– a reminder that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not required to change the way the President is elected.
The normal process of effecting change in the method of electing the President is specified in the U.S. Constitution, namely action by the state legislatures. This is how the current system was created, and this is the built-in method that the Constitution provides for making changes.