[EL] Does 269-269 worsen the faithless elector problem?

Fri Oct 26 13:37:46 PDT 2012

Faithless electors mattered in the election of 1836.  They prevented the Democratic Party nominee for vice-president from winning in the electoral college.  The U.S. Senate had to choose the vice-president that year.

Richard Winger

415-922-9779

PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147

--- On Fri, 10/26/12, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu> wrote:

From: Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Does 269-269 worsen the faithless elector problem?
To: "'JBoppjr at aol.com'" <JBoppjr at aol.com>, "john at johnkoza.com" <john at johnkoza.com>, "derek.muller at gmail.com" <derek.muller at gmail.com>, "law-election at UCI.EDU" <law-election at uci.edu>
Date: Friday, October 26, 2012, 1:26 PM

I’ve never quite understood why, if you favor the electoral college, there is any reason to worry about “faithless” electors. And given that there has never
 been a “faithless” elector that mattered (and little reason to think any “faithless” elector would have remained “faithless” if it had), I think there is even less reason to worry about it. 

Bradley A. Smith 
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault

  Professor of Law 
Capital University Law School 
303 East Broad Street 
Columbus, OH 43215 
(614) 236-6317 
bsmith at law.capital.edu 
http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp 

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu]
On Behalf Of JBoppjr at aol.com

Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 12:02 PM

To: john at johnkoza.com; derek.muller at gmail.com; law-election at UCI.EDU

Subject: Re: [EL] Does 269-269 worsen the faithless elector problem? 

Here is the Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act.

Click here: Faithful Presidential Electors Act

I was on the Drafting Committee and I think it is an admirable bipartisan effort worthy of adoption. We ran it by the National Popular Vote people and this Uniform
 Law works even if that is adopted. 

We believe it would fix the unfaithful elector problem as well as fix other potential problems such as vacancies, etc. 

Thank you for recommending it, John  Jim Bopp 

In a message dated 10/26/2012 11:43:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
john at johnkoza.com writes: 

State legislatures should give some attention to, and pass, the Uniform Law Commission’s “Uniform
 Faithful Presidential Electors Act.”  The Act has several of the features of North Carolina’s current law. The Act provides a statutory remedy in the event a presidential elector fails to vote in accordance with the voters of his or her state. The Act has
 a state-administered pledge of faithfulness, with any attempt by an elector to submit a vote in violation of that pledge, effectively constituting resignation from the office of elector. The proposed uniform law calls for the election of both electors and
 alternate electors. The Act provides a mechanism for filling a vacancy created for that reason or any other.   

Dr. John R. Koza 
Box 1441 
Los Altos Hills, California 94023 USA 
Phone: 650-941-0336 
Fax: 650-941-9430 
Email:
john at johnkoza.com 
URL:
www.johnkoza.com

URL:

www.NationalPopularVote.com 

From: Derek
 Muller [mailto:derek.muller at gmail.com] 

Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:15 PM

To: Election Law

Subject: [EL] Does 269-269 worsen the faithless elector problem? 

Dear all, 

Perhaps one of you knows the answer to this problem. If the electoral vote is tied at 269, the race is
 thrown to the House of Representatives, where, it is assumed, Mitt Romney would win. 

But, I imagine that there would be a significant amount of canvassing of Mr. Romney's electors by Barack
 Obama's team in an attempt to win over just one of those electors and break the tie. After all, we would likely know most of the electors shortly after November 6, but the electors would not cast ballots until December 17. 

Additionally, the contingent election in the 12th Amendment allows for the top three electoral vote-getters
 to be voted on in the House. If it's 269-269, isn't there a great incentive for, say, one of Mr. Obama's electors to vote for Jill Stein, or one of Mr. Romney's electors to vote for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul? Then, we might have an even more absurd contingent
 election: 269 electoral votes for Mr. Obama; 268 electoral votes for Mitt Romney; 1 vote for Ron Paul; top three thrown into the House. (Which adds an additional problem: what if there are several candidates who each receive a single castaway electoral vote?
 Who wins the coveted third slot before the House if Ms. Stein, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Paul all receive 1 electoral vote?) 

Best, 

Derek 

Derek T. Muller 
Associate Professor of Law 
Pepperdine University School of Law 
24255 Pacific Coast Hwy. 
Malibu, CA 90263 
+1 310-506-7058 
SSRN Author Page:
http://ssrn.com/author=464341 

_______________________________________________

Law-election mailing list

Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu

http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election 

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121026/29e4c462/attachment.html>