The latest in our long-running “At Least They’re Not Your Legislator” series, Arizona Public Radio’s Bree Burkitt reports on a measure that Republican state Sen. Anthony Kern has introduced that would, if somehow approved by what would need to be extremely masochistic voters, allow the Arizona legislature to appoint presidential electors without worrying about pesky inconveniences like the popular vote:
Currently, the candidate who wins the popular vote gets Arizona’s electors.
They then cast their votes on the same day in December alongside all the other electors across the country.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1014 would override that process entirely.
Instead, the Arizona legislature would have the sole authority to appoint the presidential electors — regardless of which candidate actually received the most votes. [Pols emphasis]
Sen. Anthony Kern was one of the slate of fake electors chosen by Arizona Republicans to substitute for the state’s real electors as part of the failed plot to swing the state’s election in 2020, and was reportedly in the crowd outside the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021. It can be deduced from both of these facts that to Sen. Kern, the rules of our democratic process are just speedbumps when they prevent Republicans from winning. Such a brazen assault on the authority of voters to decide elections seems unthinkable, but considering that’s what Donald Trump’s rejection of the outcome of the election was all about, it’s really not. Former CU scholar and Trump (and Colorado GOP) attorney John Eastman promoted the crackpot “independent state legislature” theory to argue that legislatures had the power to defy the results of elections if they felt like it in 2020.
Is just a rude shock when they spell it out so plainly. Their solution is to give politicians the power to ignore the voters in presidential elections.
You don’t want to live in a state (or nation) where that’s the law of the land.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: Duke Cox
IN: Rep. Brandi Bradley Desperate To Start Her Very Own Culture War
BY: harrydoby
IN: Weekend Open Thread
BY: Lon McP
IN: Rep. Brandi Bradley Desperate To Start Her Very Own Culture War
BY: Gilpin Guy
IN: Weekend Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Gov. Polis Rolls Out Welcome Mat For Florida’s Spurned LGBTQ+ Tourists
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Gov. Polis Rolls Out Welcome Mat For Florida’s Spurned LGBTQ+ Tourists
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Friday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Scary looking mofo.
This is a completely reprehensible resolution to propose, in my opinion, but I've gotta believe it's perfectly cool and legal under the antiquated and anachronistic U.S. Constitution and the Electoral College. It's up to state governments to decide the process for becoming electors, and if electors aren't legally bound to the popular vote or something, they can basically vote for anyone, even people who aren't on the Presidential ballot. This could be the great Ron Paul for President resurgence we've all been waiting for!
deleted … rewritten below
I recall in high school civics class learning about tyrannical dictatorships run by religious nut cases, and how much we should aspire to achieve that perfect style of government! Oh wait, it was English Lit, reading George Orwell's 1984!
But I suspect Red state schools might have that mixed up as well.
This is certainly not an endorsement of this crackpot idea, but …..
Does everyone recall their early US history, and how members of the Electoral College were selected prior to 1828?
In the early days, the electoral literally were selected by the state legislatures. It was considered to be representative goverment on the assumption – a very faulty assumption prior to the reapportionment cases in the 1960's – that the legislatures were directly elected by the voters and therefore they represented the will of the voters.
And let’s not forget that these people have made a fetish of the “intent of the framers” non-sense when it comes to constitutional law.
In the odd "can't use this as a precedent" decision,
However, those state legislature also have constraints when it comes to selecting Presidential electors.
Allowing the legislature to choose electors without a popular vote falls for the same reason as the National Popular Vote Compact fails — in both, the decision denies the notion of a popular vote.
Maybe this is just meant as clarification…
Chiafalo, and a fairly similar case in Colorado, were "faithless elector" challenges. Both states have laws instructing electors how to vote, based on the popular vote. In Colorado, an elector wanted to vote for John Kasich, but the courts disallowed this vote and Colorado replaced the elector. The state laws were upheld as legitimate.
The Arizona guy wants to change state law, and as much as I hate what he's trying to do, I don't believe the U.S. Constitution has any say that would prevent it. Hopefully other legislators or public pressure will put the kibosh on his resolution, because it's really nothing but an extremely serious power grab.
Today, there are still several states that let electors vote for, let's say Taylor Swift, if that's what they want to do. If there's no state law about the popular vote, electors don't have to vote based on the popular vote, at least per the Constitution.