web analytics
November 29, 2014 / 7 Kislev, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post
IDC Herzliya Campus A Day on Campus

To mark IDC Herzliya’s 20th anniversary, we spent a day following Prof. Uriel Reichman, IDC’s founder and president, and Jonathan Davis, VP for External Relations, around its delightful campus.



Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed

Aaron Klein

Aaron Klein

Another Blow To The Electoral College

The National Popular Vote effort, which could see only 14 states – those with the largest populations – decide the presidency for voters in all 50 states, is more than halfway to its goal of legally bypassing the electoral college mapped out in the Constitution.

Last week, the Maine state senate voted in support of the plan one week after both houses of the New York legislature – the assembly and senate – overwhelmingly approved a measure to support the plan.

Now the governors of both states will need to decide whether to formally back the National Popular Vote, or NVP.

The plan is more than halfway to its goal of electing future presidents via the popular vote, after Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (D) signed on last July.

The NPV campaign seeks to obtain the consent of the majority of the 538 votes in the Electoral College –270 – to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

Now 10 jurisdictions possessing 136 electoral votes are part of the plan – 50.4% of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring the National Popular Vote interstate compact into effect.

The states will not be required to award their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner until the NPV has signed up enough states to garner 270 electoral votes.

The Founding Fathers firmly rejected a purely popular vote to elect the president because they wanted to balance the power of the larger states against the smaller.

The Electoral College was fashioned as a compromise between an election of the president by direct popular vote and election by Congress.

The NPV effort could change the way Americans vote without amending the U.S. Constitution. The plan simply requires that enough states sign up.

It would take three-quarters of the states to pass a constitutional amendment to repeal the Electoral College. NPV minimizes the number of states that would need to agree. Once enough states agree to allot their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, the Electoral College would become irrelevant.

 

La Raza Affiliate Receive $30 Million From Government

The recipient of a $30 million grant as part of President Obama’s “promise zone” initiative is an affiliate of the radical National Council of La Raza.

A group called the Youth Policy Institute, or YPI, was approved by the Obama administration as the lead agency for Los Angeles when the city was selected by the White House and Department of Education two years ago to receive “promise zone” grants.

To little fanfare, YPI was awarded a $30 million grant in January 2012 as the “promise zone” recipient for Los Angeles.

The organization is slated to receive potentially tens or even hundreds of millions more, with the “promise zone” program pledging up to $500 million in grants over ten years purportedly to help revitalize central Los Angeles neighborhoods.

Promise Zone is Obama’s signature education and anti-poverty program aimed at transforming schools and communities “into vibrant centers of opportunity and excellence.”

Unreported by the news media is that the Youth Policy Institute is an affiliate of the National Council of La Raza, or NCLR.

La Raza is directly tied to the White House. Cecilia Munoz, former senior vice president at La Raza, now serves as director of the White House Domestic Policy Council with specific focus on immigration issues.

La Raza itself highlighted its relationship with YPI in a press release in January boasting about the Obama administration grant.

YPI was selected by La Raza in 2011 as its affiliate of the year.  YPI is funded by La Raza, while YPI utilizes La Raza to finance AmeriCorps members working in eight L.A. schools.  AmerciCorps is a national service organization.

About the Author: Aaron Klein is a New York Times bestselling author and senior reporter for WND.com. He is also host of an investigative radio program on New York's 970 AM Radio on Sundays from 7 to 9 p.m. Eastern. His website is KleinOnline.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

3 Responses to “Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed”

  1. Anonymous says:

    With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in only the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency with a mere 23% of the nation's votes!

  2. Anonymous says:

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls

    in recent or past closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA –75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%;

    in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%;

    in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and

    in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.

    Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.

    The bill has passed 33 state legislative chambers in 22 rural, small, medium, and large states with 250 electoral votes.
    Based on the current mix of states that have enacted the National Popular Vote compact, it could take about 25 states to reach the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the compact.

    NationalPopularVote

  3. Anonymous says:

    The Electoral College is the 538 dedicated party activists elected by us from among party slates. They represent the total number of electors granted to states based on how many members of Congress they have.

    With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a republic, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes by states, to represent us and conduct the business of government.

    Rather than "dump," “bypass,” or “junk” the Electoral College, National Popular Vote allows individual states to use their unqualified and absolute right to have the Electoral College accomplish a goal that more than two-thirds of Americans, throughout the country, have consistently supported since polling on this began in 1944.

    States enacting National Popular Vote replace their state or district winner-take-all rules to guarantee every vote, everywhere, in every election matters to the candidates, is equal and counts, and the candidate with the most votes in the country wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    National Popular Vote is based on Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide how to appoint its own electors. Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states:
    “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 encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for how to award a state's electoral votes. Over the years, states have used their unqualified and absolute power to enact laws for how to award their electors in presidential elections.

    Prior to arriving at the eventual wording of section 1 of Article II, the Constitutional Convention specifically voted against a number of different methods for selecting the President, including
    ● having state legislatures choose the President,
    ● having governors choose the President, and
    ● a national popular vote.
    After these (and other) methods were debated and rejected, the Constitutional Convention decided to leave the entire matter to the states.

    In 1789, 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. Only 3 states used the "winner-take-all" system based on the statewide popular vote. Similar laws in other states only became prevalent decades after the deaths of the Founding Fathers. 2 states do not use the system.

    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 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. The abnormal process is to go outside the Constitution, and amend it.

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry .
NYT Ignores US Condemnation of PA Incitement, Prints Info on Ferguson Cop
Latest Indepth Stories
Kessim (religious leaders) mark the opening of a synagogue in the village of Gomenge, Ethopia, one of five built in Gondar with JDC aid, 1988
Courtesy of American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, New York.

In a world where people question whether they should be engaged, we are a reminder that all Jews are responsible for one another.

Greiff-112814-Levaya

My son is seventeen; he didn’t want to talk about what happened, or give any details of the Rosh Yeshiva’s words of chizuk.

Protesters in Ferguson, Missouri

All involved in the Ferguson debate should learn the laws pertinent to non-Jews: the Noahide Laws.

Charley Levine

Prominent Jewish leaders acknowledged that their predecessors had mistreated the Bergson Group.

Abbas has been adding new layers of rhetoric to his tactical campaign to de-Judaize Jerusalem

The Jew’s crime is his presence.

Hamas’s love for death tried to have as many Palestinian civilians killed as possible

Israel recognizes the fabrication called a Palestinian nation; So what do we want from the Swedes?

Arab attacking Jews in the land date back a century, long before Israel was created or in control.

Creativity without clarity is not sufficient for writing. I am eternally thankful to Hashem for his gift to me.

Golden presents a compelling saga of poor but determined immigrants who fled pogroms and harsh conditions in their homelands for a better life in a land of opportunity.

It seems to us that while the Jewish entitlement to the land of Israel transcends the Holocaust, the Jewish experience during that tragic time is the most solid of foundations for these “national rights.”

Too many self-styled civil rights activists seemed determined to force, by their relentless pressure, an indictment regardless of what an investigation might turn up.

Unfortunately, at present, the rabbinate does not play a positive role in preventing abuse.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/aaron-klein/quick-takes-news-you-may-have-missed-228/2014/04/14/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: