Waterloo for the National Popular Vote movement?

AT readers don’t need to be introduced to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, the desperation measure concocted by the Democrats in an effort to make an end run around the Electoral College by pledging states to abide by the popular vote. Fourteen states, along with D.C., have so far passed the compact. One curious provision is that the compact does not go into effect until the number of electoral votes involved reaches 270 – a simple majority which would guarantee a candidate’s victory. The number of electoral votes controlled as of now is 189 – clearly, the promoters have been concentrating on large jurisdictions.

The compact has 81 votes to go, a circumstance that has caused some on the right to go into their customary “it’s all over… it’s too late… nothing can be done…” act. This is not surprising – many of them start screaming “it’s too late” every time there’s a loud noise. It has become a standard feature of the American political scene, like Mom, apple pie, and corruption in Chicago. That was where it stood until the week before last, when on May 30 Gov. Steve Sisolak of Nevada vetoed the bill, which had been passed by the state senate nine days before. This action may very well break the momentum of the march to 270, marking the high tide of the Democrat’s latest attempt to subvert representative democracy. The Electoral College has outdone the Founder’s fondest hopes for it. Over the past twenty years alone, in has prevented two utterly unworthy candidates from occupying the White House – Al Gore, a flake at the very least, and Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt American politician since Aaron Burr. Both, of course, were Democrats, which raises a very interesting question, because so too is Steve Sisolak. The motive behind the national popular vote movement is unquestionably a search for a means for the Dems, who can no longer command a national following, to gain the presidency by hook or by crook. So why did Sisolak turn against his own party and its future presidential hopes? Sisolak gave as his reason the fact that “Nevada’s interests could diverge from the interests of large states,” which at least shows that he was thinking, unlike the governors of Colorado, New Mexico, or Washington, just to mention three. It has often been pointed out that the end result of the popular vote movement would be national elections effectively decided by New York, Southern California, D.C., and a handful of other high-density districts. The government of the U.S. would be effectively handed over to the Northeast, a few spots on the West Coast, and a couple of Midwestern cities. As a second-order development, media coverage and interest in any other areas would simply cease. Even today, coverage of the flyover states is as minimal as mass media can get away with. Under the new system, it would be nonexistent. And so would flyover politics. From that point on, all presidential candidates would come from New York, the Massachusetts Bay area, LA, and perhaps Chicago. Politicians from those areas would be the sole recipients of national coverage. Everybody else – all the Trumans, the Jacksons, the Coolidges, the Lincolns – would be as unknown as if they were living in the Mato Grosso. It’s likely that this occurred to Steven Sisolak. If he ever daydreamed about a President Sisolak – and let’s face it, all governors do – he surely realized that he would have to give it up under any popular vote system. It’s just as likely that governors all across the country, pondering now why did he do that have had light bulbs go off over their little noggins as the thought penetrated at last. It’s for this reason that the entire movement will probably go belly up very shortly. How likely is it that a state governor will willingly sign away his political ambitions – particularly if he’s a Democrat? One remarkable – and often overlooked – aspect of the American system is that it harnesses pure self-interest to the protection of the nation as a whole. Beautiful, isn’t it?