DISENFRANCHISING WISCONSIN - Your state next? Soros connection?

[WhiskeyGirl]

DISENFRANCHISING WISCONSIN

 By Charlie Sykes

Story Created: Feb 18, 2010

Story Updated: Feb 18, 2010

 We had a genuine WTF moment yesterday when this came up.. a. truly dumb idea that has the added benefit of probably being unconstitutional as well.

A bill the Democrats are attempting to ramrod through the state legislature, Assembly Bill 751, would create a national popular vote for the U.S. presidency, essentially undermining the Electoral College.  The bill was introduced late February 15 and the Assembly Elections Committee scheduled a public hearing for February 17 at 1 p.m.  The legislature is pushing this dangerous bill through at breakneck speed.  AB 751 is part of a national effort to disenfranchise voters that is gaining ground at an alarming rate (with a troubling connection to the notorious liberal money-bags, George Soros).

...

This bill would authorize the State of Wisconsin to take part in an interstate compact with other states, pledging that our state’s electoral votes will go to the presidential candidate who wins, not the popular vote of Wisconsin, but the national popular vote.  If you think your vote is just one of many in the state right now, imagine what little impact your vote would have if it was only one of millions and millions of votes! With the Electoral College, your vote is a higher percentage of the total votes from the state and has a greater impact on the presidential election.  With a national popular vote, the states with the highest populations determine the president, and then Wisconsin is forced to ratify their vote, regardless of whether that candidate was the choice of the majority of Wisconsin voters.

read more here - http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/84686382.html

In Wisconsin, voters do not have to show any kind of ID when they vote or register.  They just give a name to vote.

To register, I saw someone use a utility bill and verbal vouching from an companion.

[WhiskeyGirl]

Resolution would involve Wis. in support for US electoral reform

National bill would alter presidential elections so decided by popular vote

An Assembly committee held a public hearing Wednesday on a resolution that would enter Wisconsin into an agreement to support changing presidential elections to a popular vote.

Currently, each state has the power to allocate their electoral votes as they see fit and can also change their state laws concerning awarding their electoral votes.

The bill would sign Wisconsin on to the National Popular Vote bill, which is an agreement among states that they support presidential candidates being elected through a popular vote. Under this bill, all of a state’s electoral votes would be given to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states.

According to Rep. Kelda Helen Roys, D-Madison, the bill would only take effect when enough states have passed it to have 270 electoral votes, which is enough to vote to elect a president.

Roys said the current “winner takes all” system is not reflective of a democracy.

“In a democracy, you start with the fundamental principle that the candidate that gets the most votes should win the election,” Roys said. “That is true in every single election, whether it be for dog catcher, school board [or] prom queen. It’s true for every single election except one, [which is] arguably the most important: the leader of the free world.”

Appling added if people really want to change the way presidential elections are voted on, legislators should put it up for an amendment to the constitution instead of entering Wisconsin into a “pact” with other states.

“Should this bill continue on this pace through the legislative process, Wisconsin citizens will have little to no input on an issue of considerable consequence, with significant change for our state and our nation, and will have major ramifications,” Appling said.

read more here - http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/02/18/resolution_would_inv.php

Would votes in the less populated states become meaningless? Only votes in big states like California, New York, and Florida matter?

Citizens of all these other states would have a perpetual blank check from the Wisconsin account?

Bringing all the bad of institutions like the UN to the nation?

Does the Federal government need more power?  More authority?

Should citizens of other states have control over my community?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Now Wisconsin lawmakers are discussing a bill that could change the way the state's electoral votes are counted. The current system gives all of Wisconsin's ten electoral votes to the candidate who wins Wisconsin's popular vote. If the bill were to become law, Wisconsin would become a member of a group of states that all agree to give their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

Republican State Representative Jeff Stone says, "Effectively what it says is no matter what happens in Wisconsin, our electors have to vote for a person who had the most votes nationally." Stone sits on a committee that held a public hearing on the bill Wednesday.

Milwaukee Democratic Representative Annette Polly Williams is a co-sponsor of the bill. She says some in her district are displeased with the idea. She says, "I'm getting a lot of mail and phone calls in opposition. I have to listen to what they're saying."

Critics say that if Wisconsin signs up to the popular vote partnership, it will sign away it's electoral importance. Stone said, "We'd get overridden by larger, more populous states like California and New York."

more here - http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-100217-popular-vote,0,988697.story

[WhiskeyGirl]

Can Wisconsin control voter registration and vote fraud in other states?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Have you heard about this new bill in Madison, AB 751, The National Popular Vote Bill? I doubt that you have unless you listen to Vicki McKenna or WVCY. The Public Hearing is today.

But don't feel like you have been asleep at the wheel, the bill was only just introduced 2 days ago on Monday, Feb. 15, 2010. Also on Monday, they announced the Public Hearing for today, Wednesday, Feb. 17th at 1pm.

Think they are trying to ram this one through below the radar? (I heard Vicki mention it yesterday. She also talked about it today in her first 45 minutes. Do listen to the first hour for Wed. Feb 17. I then Googled the bill number and found WVCY's Homefront blog page on it.)

The actual bill proposes "entering into an agreement among the states to elect the president of the United States by means of a national popular vote."

Now at first blush, that might not seem like a bad idea, to just count the popular vote. But think about it. If popular vote alone decided elections, the most population dense states would dictate who our president is. The top 3 states being California, New York and Texas. Urban areas would decide for us all. Even if you factor in the top 10 states, like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Illinois, etc. Wisconsin is still not a player. So what about the other 40 states in the Union?

If this change goes through, why would any presidential candidate bother coming to Wisconsin?

An even more insidious aspect of this bill is that it calls for a Constitutional Convention (Correction, it doesn't call for it ) it SIDESTEPS the Constitution to make the change from the Electoral College to Popular Vote. (More on that below the legislator info.)

Counting only the popular vote flies in the face of the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, who realized they had to balance the influence of densely populated states with those of less population. That is why we have a House of Representatives, whose membership is based on population, balanced by the Senate, that gives every state the same number of representatives. In a similar way, the Popular Vote is balanced by the Electoral College.

As I mentioned above, this bill would call for a Constitutional Convention SIDESTEPS the Constitutional amendment process to make the change from the Electoral College to Popular Vote.

read more here - http://www.brookfieldnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/84620322.html

[WhiskeyGirl]

“Wisconsin would lose big time!” under National Popular Vote

Wisconsin has made it onto NPV’s list of targeted states. Dave Zweifel’s Madison.com article, “Using popular vote to elect president is the way to go,” parrots one of the National Popular Vote organization’s most often-used (and faulty) arguments: that because the Electoral College motivates candidates to campaign in some states (“swing states”) more than others (“safe states”) it should be eliminated as unfair and outdated.

Thankfully, the good people of Wisconsin take Zweifel to task in the comments section. I’ll let them speak for themselves:

    * “Why should my vote in Wisconsin have anything to do with New York, Texas, California or other more heavily populated states?”

    * “Many of the arguments for popular vote make reference to the uncompetitiveness of certain states. Many states that used to be solidly Democrat are now Republican and vice versa. Where they stand today is not a reason to change the system.”

    * “Contrary to popular belief, we are not a democratic nation; we are however a republic made up of 50 democratic states … all of which deserve their share of the pie.”

    * “Wisconsin would lose big time! Normally voting pretty independently, we see both Democrats and Republicans campaigning here to sway our vote, that would never happen with a popular vote. Some buildings in Manhattan have more population than Wisconsin cities like Wausau or Chippewa Falls.”

    * “Each party would only seek to turn out as many votes as possible in ‘their’ regions of the country … In this scenario, a handful of states and heavily populated cities win while the remaining areas suffer.”

    * “The only difference this would make is that instead of certain battleground states getting all the attention, the high population states would.”

http://www.saveourstates.com/2010/380/

Someone on radio asked is the Constitution was a national suicide pact.  If one state falls, all the other states are legally bound to go with them over the cliff.

Should the nation be like a row of dominoes?

[WhiskeyGirl]

"The recurring theme in these comments is how the Electoral College actually represents the will of the people better than a national popular vote would. "

[WhiskeyGirl]

Some Wisconsin Democrats are working to disenfranchise Wisconsin voters in all future presidential elections!

Since the founding of our nation, we have used the Electoral College process to elect the President of the United States. This system equalizes the field so a state with a high population doesn’t have a disproportionate influence on the elections. Each state is meant to be a popular election, then the delegates from those states are committed to elect the President. Each state is awarded a number of electoral votes for president based on state population. Without the Electoral College, candidates would be able to focus on just a few high population states while ignoring rural states like Wisconsin, Iowa, Wyoming and the rest of “fly-over country.”

http://badgerblogger.com/?p=15687

Maybe it's a sign that the federal government is just too big and bloated and shouldn't have so much power.

Why shouldn't all minority populations have equal representation?