Thanks for posting this. I couldn't find anything on this except what I heard on the radio from a caller.

Anyway, this is big. It stinks of...what's the word...unConstitutional.

It's unAmerican, I'll tell you that.

Unfortunately, I don't see how this is unconstitutional. The states retain the power to decide how their electors are chosen. Certainly the present system is skewed towards the small states, so I can understand why CA, IL, NJ and NC would be on board. For VT and ME to join, though, is just moronic.

Small states, as well as large states, shouldn't flatter themselves.

They may get a lot of attention from presidential PRIMARY candidates, but the system produces behavior and spending in PRESIDENTIAL campaigns, in 12 of the 13 small states (Alaska, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming) and many large states (California, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia) that ignores voters. In the presidential election, for all practical purposes, clearly documented by the overwhelming time and money spent, only voters in “battleground states” are courted and “count.” Voters and their issues, in the predictably safe or lost states, are ignored by presidential candidates and campaigns. Voters for the losing candidate of the state are not “counted” in the vote that actually elects the president, their state’s electoral votes.

The National Popular Vote bill would move presidential election attention and the value of individual voters beyond the few “swing states” by honoring a national popular vote for the president, to make every vote equal, in whatever state (be it historically blue, red or purple).

So far, 16 small and large state legislatures in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, Vermont, and Washington (one-sixth of the legislative chambers in the U.S.), have agreed to make every vote equal by passing the bill in one or both houses. It has been signed into law in Illinois, Maryland, and New Jersey - with a total of 46 electoral votes (one-sixth of the way).

Spammy spam spam - Next time, buy an ad.

Hey, anonymous. I've erased the website name, as you will likely not notice because you're only here to plug your own.

In the future, if you want to plug the sub-moronic ideas at your website, at least have the courtesy to throw a few bucks into the tipjar, okay?

-This is why my home of residence is in Alabama.
Call me archaic but I see this as being a borderline states-right concern due to the forfeiting of state individualism for a "fair" count of all votes. I dunno, I feel like I vote as an Alabamian FIRST, and then as a resident of the United States next. With this National Vote Bill would (IMHO) just remove that demographic identity from my participation in the process, something I actually like to know that I am showing. My vote may not due to my geographic location count as much as the states with more delegates, but....

Eh. Whatever.

Hello. My wife and I bought our house about 6 months ago. It was a foreclosure and we were able to get a great deal on it. We also took advantage of the 8K tax credit so that definitely helped. We did an extensive remodeling job and now I want to refinance to cut the term to a 20 or 15 year loan. Does anyone know any good sites for mortgage information? Thanks!

Mike