Transcripts For CSPAN2 Congressional Forum Focuses On The Future Of The Electoral College 20161212

Im going to read a statement which i typically dont do at these but i want to make sure you full will you understand fully understand what i have to say on the issue that i think is mostly on our minds this morning. Obviously, any foreign breach of our cybercurt measures is serving, and i strongly condemn any such efforts. Prior to the election the director of National Intelligence released a statement saying that the russian government directed the recent compromises of emails from u. S. Persons and institutions. Including from u. S. Political organizations. That is what the Intelligence Community believes can be said in had unclassified remarks without risking sources and methods. Anything else, anything else is irresponsible likely illegal, and potentially for partisan political gain. I agree with senator schumer, chairman mccain, burr, and others simply cannot be a partisan issue. Let me remind all of you that the Senate Intelligence committee on which i and chairman of the Arm Service Committee said as members is more than capable of conducting complete review of this matter. And senator schumer will soon join us on the committee and he can review this matter through the regular order. I have every confidence in chairman burr that hell review the matter in a responsible way. The Obama Administration is also now launching review and when they office of the director of National Intelligence completes its review, there will be Additional Information released to the public in a responsible manner. Chairman mccain will be within the threat of cyberattacks. That will be useful. As we need to inte grit our cybercapability into our overall war fighting doctrine. The Obama Administration for eight years attempted to reset relations with russia and setback while russia expanded its fever influence were intervene in crimea, Eastern Ukraine and amount to bully the baltic country it is defies belief that somehow republicans in senate are reluctant to either review russian tactics or ignore them. So last let me say that i have the highest confidence in the Intelligence Community in especially the central agencies, cia filled with selfless patriot anonymously risk their lives with the American People. Excuse me. Can i have some water . This, here, yes. Let me just say in wraing up the congress and then open up for your questions. I think about any objective standard to 114th congress, looks pretty good compared to the previous one. Everything from cures bill and in 20 years, faa, water of resources bill, permanent tax relief, we address the opioid and Prescription Drug epidemic and rewrite of no child left behind, the k12 education issue. Via accountable, cybersecurity bill, a permanent human traffic and many others, so even though there were, obviously, some pretty big difference its in a time of divided government, i think we were able to search for the things that it was my desire to search for thing hads to agree on and make some progress for the country and there were a number of things upon which had we were able to score some points for the American People. So with that let me throw it open. [inaudible] it was as i indicated the reason i read that statement sing that pretty thoroughly covers what im prepared to say. About that issue and you said you talked about an investigation bipartisan investigation and commission in any way that you want to do through the intelligence committee. You oppose were going to follow the regular order its an important subject, and we intend to review it on the bipartisan basis. In your statement there critique of the Obama Administration reset with russia or attempt to war with russia. Is it like wise concern to you the signal that are coming from the new administration on the top of a attitude and orientation and more friend friendliness with appointment and statements . Let me speak for myself, the russians are not our friends. Invaded crimea, senator mccain and i had some democratic friends met with the delegation from the baltic countries just this past week. To say that theyre nervous about the russians to put it mildly. Let me also say as ive said last year nato is important. We intend to keep the commitments that are made in the nato agreement which i think by any object will be one of the most if not the most successful military alliance in the world history. And i think we ought to approach all of these issues on the assumption that the russians do not wish us well. Connell is it a problem, though, that thing incoming president is sending resource signals to russia that he is sending and what hes to say about his supposed appointment [inaudible] im going to say this a lot of times but saying i addressed how i feel about the russians, and i hope that those who are going to be in position to responsibility in the new Administration Share my u view. You mentioned your confidence but are you concerned that president elect continues to deny october conclusion that russia was behind the hacking and now questioning the credibility of the cia . [laughter] look, ive already addressed my own view about where we are on those issues, and i really dont have any intention of further elaborating. Yep. Should president elect trump nominate secretary of state do you have any concern about a nominee to benefit from [inaudible] russia . Ive been very impressed with the nomination so far. And well have to wait and see who is nominated for secretary of state and well, obviously, treat whoever that is with respect and go through the regular process and respond to questions and see where it comes out. [inaudible] do you think confirmed in the senate . Lets wait until we get nominees. I think of the nominees that were already aware of, i think im optimistic that theyll all be confirmed. But i dont to accommodate comment on kind of a fan of nominee today. Yep. [inaudible] one more time to clarify for us it was reported over the weekend that you want exe expressed skepticism [inaudible] can you clarify for us . I clarified for you what i had to say about that in the statement that i read at our opening. Yeah. Can you state, though, this president elect is getting on such a great footing with the intelligence overall with the general you know, trajectory that is getting on right now . Well ill comment on who has been nominate sod far. I think pompeo is a great choice and im optimistic to have a Good National security team. All aspects of it in place. With regard to his relationship with the Intelligence Agency i think i pretty well covered that. Yeah. Senator mcconnell [inaudible] three year transition to replace obamacare and saying thats too long. Do you agree that too long to wait three years to replace obamacare . Let me just make sure everybody understands this status quo is not sustainable. The notion that we could do nothing and allow the current law to implode is unacceptable. So i hope no one believes no action. Is possible or appropriate. Therefore, we will move right after the first of the year on an obamacare replacement revolution. And then well work to come up with a better proposal than current law because current law is simply unacceptable and not sustainable. And well be working with the various stakeholders to get their best advice about what comes next. And with regard to the phasein period, the timing of all of that, that is yet to be determined. But let me just say again, doing nothing is not an option because you have seen the headline all across america. All last year about this status quo. Personal preference [inaudible] when we get through how we do that ill be happy to let you know. Stakeholders that you said youll be working with are also warning about danger that would come if replacement that were not established before it would happen. A Hospital Medical association, do you how does that factor into your decision . None of those poem that you mention are happy with a status quo. They want changes too. And were going to work with them to come up with a better situation than this monstrosity that was left behind by the Obama Administration. Any framework established before you endure in terms of what a replacement would look like. At the first of the year move forward first with the obamacare replacement revolution. What comes next is what comes next. In other words legislatively, then we will determine what the replacement is going to be. While youre trying to put together that replacement is one of your principles to cover as many [inaudible] well l85 of americans have coverage. And still roughly 25 million who dont. So if coverage was the issue obamacare was a failure. Surely, we can do better for the the people that means as ive said earlier move first with obamacare replacement resolution and then come with the replacement actually will be. Yep. Senator suggested replacement will be phased in over time that his a lota lot of people on lettingr plan, that will be separate. I dont know how many times i have to say the same they think. But were going to be working in the phasein period and what it looks like once we get to step two, step one is obamacare replacement resolution which well turn to after the first of the year. Paul back on russia, what exactly will the Intelligence Community be doing and is this just going to be in the Intelligent Community and the house have some sort of role here . Yeah, senator mccain i think senator burr will both be looking at this issue and dong it on a bipartisan basis as i indicated in my statement. Walk us through the fiscal budget solution on the house side [inaudible] your thoughts that it will be the same type of document from the senate side and then see any legislation on that side of the aca repealing with . We anticipate doing two budget revolutions this year. The first will be the Obamacare Repeal resolution. And then we will to one later in the spring which will largely be dedicated to tax reform. So it will be two this year. And they will set up reconciliation follow on vehicle for us to address two very important issues of president elect talked about about and we all care about repealing and replacing Obama Obamacare and imrensive comprehensive tax reform single biggest reason for that is our tax structure. Which makes it very difficult very instances to see the Corporate Tax rate and individual tax rate that most businesses use as well is way too high and uncompetitive situation. Now president elect made it clear to make a move on as many regulatory changes as he can as soon as he takes office. Much of that was done by executive order or regulation of one kind or another and two biggest impediment is overregulation and tax structure and president elect seems to be committed to eases draying both of those and republican majority in the House Majority as well. Past year was getting regular order restored [inaudible] passing spending bills on time, in response to decades, obviously, failed in that i didnt. The democrats as just a refresh your memory they decided to ball up the process which you can do if you have enough of a minority to do it because they us to end new ar end situation like we did and see if we have a different view next year. I hope so. I gave up to six weeks to try to process individual appropriation bills. The democrats wouldnt let them out of the senate. So put the failure where it belongs. But [inaudible] will be smaller next year true is same in the house. I guess im wondering why any data next year or should we . Well, i hope so. There would be enough Senate Democrat tousle baa the process up if they choose to what end, though . I think what they concluded look this past year was that when they have a president that they like, balling up the process give the president a lot of cloud at the end of the year, and actually benefited them. It will be interesting to see if they think balling up the process when you have a different president of a Different Party in the white house make sense. Maybe theyll have more incentive to cooperate to get back to regular corporation process which i speaker and i would both very much like to do. Call on them. It certainly was this year, and minority in the senate is not irrelevant unless it is a tiny minority. Senator last week democrats tried to get the president elect to weigh in on the [inaudible] by america did you see him or encouraged to stay out of it. What do you make out of the fact that he didnt stay . My own view on that is the Coal Miner Health care issue yatd hoped we would get a full year. We ended up getting enough fix through the deer it duration of cr and my goal to get that Coal Miner Health care issue fixed. [inaudible] in the past it shall for the first time it expires, are republicans going to take any affirmative action to reduce the debt and commit to nato and tax reform paying towards bills et cetera, in doing things like talked about before the election you hope to do next year like medicare and Social Security which are very difficult. Again i can only speak for myself. But i think this level of National Debt is dangerous. And unacceptable. And so whatever we choose to do next year i hope we will not lose sight. Steps that we could take that would exasperate the problem, so i am concerned about it. And all of those things i think we ought to take into consideration all each of the things that we do going forward. So president elect has talked about a massive plan over a trillion dollars a lot of other huge tax cuts which had nonpartisan expert naturally [inaudible] do you mitt to mine is to be revenue neutralo the government. That is not exasperate the issue that you raised. And on the infrastructure issue, it will be interesting to see how this is put together. We want to it see im interested in seeing what is the administration going to recommend . And i think that details are really important. What i hope we will clearly avoid and im confident we will, is trillion dollar stimulus and nobody bought too many things. It seemed to me basically what it did was bust up a bunch of federal accounts, and when you looked around trying to find examples of things that actually occurred they were darn few. So we need to do this carefully and correctly, an the issue of thousand pay for it needs to be dealt with responsibly. So wont be a legacy question im curious how you would describe yours last eight years and describe your relationship working so far with donald trump how long you speak and i understand it is regularly with a speaker. I think barack obama is a very smart guy. He wanted to most move the couny significantly to the left and he did. He did it the first two years because he had toalings total control of congress. 2 trillion surplus. And then i was wrong in my prediction three times. I thought after the 2010 election, president obama would pivot to the center. He did the do that. I thought after the 2012 election an didnt get the house election back, im sure after the 2014 election he would pivot to the . Ergs and he department it that. Clear over the last eight years that the president wanted to move america significantly to the left. What i would call the europeanization of america. High taxes, overregulation, and what you get in the end is slow growth and weve been underperforming from a growth point of view through these years a recession in world war ii. So if you bear in mind that thats what he wanted to do, i think he moved the country significantly in a european direction. The good news for us is that a lot of that was tone by executive orders and regulation. And to get the country going again, my view is as bs earlier we have to deal with a regulatory onslot and tax reform to take our foot off the brake to get it on the accelerator. And so i think that president was very effective at doing what he wanted to do. Bear in mind, reagan never had the house for eight years. He moved to the middle, raise the age for Social Security in the last comprehensive tax reform 30 years ago. Clinton when he lost the house and senate did welfare reform. And we balance the budget three years in a row. I think we can safely say that president obama he was not centuryist and with regard to the new president we have a different relationship, and hes a very high energy person. Just to give you an example. And talking about colleagues on the floor last week it was astonishing how many are talking to him. He is very, very excessable. Very energetic i wonder if the man ever sleeps, and i think were all excited about the energy and the direction that hes seems to want to take the country and best evidence of that is appointments that have been made so far all of which i think have been, you know, pretty impressive. Senator mcconnell during obama year you said debt ceiling should be instrument [inaudible] do you want to apply that principle during the trump year to view that as the instrument on one occasion it was, budget control in august of 2011. Actually did end up reducing Government Spending for two years in a row for the First Time Since the korea i can war, and the much reviled sequester s put a lot of pressure on domestic discretionary spending. And there have been other time when is we have raised the debt ceiling and not increase with some effort to reduce spending. But at least on that one o caution i think it was brought us all to the table. First of three deals idea with the Vice President who is transactional and terrific negotiator and i think if the president had wanted had wanted to do more deals with us he would have designated biden but that was in the first term there were three major deals negotiated in the first term. I did all three of them with with biden, the august 2011 budget control act, going back with the year before the twoyear century and tax cut the end of 2010 and fiscal cliff deal newiers eve of 2012. Obviously, the Vice President was not freelancing but Vice President gave him the opportunity to negotiate. In the second tomorrow, mccain a wicked sense of humor he said joe was in a witness protection program. So their best negotiator was not around during the second term, and i think it was nothing the president wanted to negotiate. Im sorry for rambling on here, but i think it is unclear to me whether the raising of the debt ceiling will carry other things with it or not. One more. Youre up. Well Senate Republicans respond by legislatively president it [inaudible] the young immigrants. About what . The action for the 2012 executive we have to see what the new administration recommends and that whole area. Well have a great christmas everyone. Well see you about next year and go back at it. Thank you. Wraps up here several nonlegislative through the year. And first one of the series will be tomorrow morning at 8 30 eastern. The new 115th congress will convene for the first time on tuesday, january 4th, it will start at noon eastern time. And as we leave this scene, a live picture of the activity outside trump tower and were likely to as you can see get some new traffic are rolling through the shot here in midtown, manhattan and first donald trump continuing to formalize his cabinet and other leadership position inside to see there is several heavily Armed Police Officers standing by lots of onlookers, and well watch the scene for a moment. I knows whats going but nothing is going on. [inaudible] as we look at the scene here president elect trump released a statement nominating general john kelly to head up the department of Homeland Security and Statement Reads in part general kelly is decades of military service and is deep commitment to fighting threat of terrorism inside our borders and serve as our secretary of department of Homeland Security then president elect trump general kelly commented on humble and grateful to serve on president elect cabinet, as Homeland Security secretary. Fox news also reporting president elect trump will nominate exxonmobil ceo rex for secretary of state according to two sources close to the transition. Mr. Trump told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday that he was getting very, very close to an official announcement. Also West Virginia senator joe mansion is meeting with the president elect today. His report saying that hes being considered for energy secretary, that meeting was originally scheduled for friday but senator mansion stayed here in washington as the senate worked on shortterm government funding. This is the scene outside we have also a camera inside trump tower as we have been watching the candidates come and go throughout the week. You can see that scene inside on our website, go to cspan. Org. Michigan congressman Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee recently hosted a forum on the future of the Electoral College. Experts discuss the pros and cons of the process. This is just over two hours. The committee will come to order. Good afternoon. I want to begin by thanking the members as well as the panelist all of whom are present for participating in todays forum on the Electoral College. Were holding this panel because recent elections and public sentiment have made it clear that there are Serious Problems with the present system for electing our president and Vice President. We begin with the fact that Hillary Clinton received more than 2. 5 million more popular votes than donald trump. The largest die divergence between popular vote in the nations history. This constitutes the very definition of antidemocratic in my view. Under our Current System, the votes of millions of people in nonswing states is are effectively lost when they vote for the candidate who loses their state because all of that states electoral votes will be given to the other candidate. This is why member was congress over three years over the years is to e lament the Electoral College, this is why 11 states are accounting for 164 electoral votes. And to votes for the winner of legislation to enter the compact has been passed by this one legislative chamber in five more states. And this is why a recent l gallup poll showed that more than 60 of the voters support direct popular election for president. We also must face up to the reality that the Electoral College is rooted in slavery. And heres how that works out. This professor ammar explains to us slaves face opposed direct elections for the president because in a direct election system, the north would outnumber the south who many slaves could not vote. But the Electoral College instead let each Southern State slaves vote with a two fifths diskowct they counted for three fifth of a person in computing its share of the overall count. Electoral college on the other happened are in my view somewhat [inaudible] Electoral College defenders say that it serves to check the passions of ordinary voters. That the framers did not account for the rise of Political Parties when creating the Electoral College. In fact, the Electoral College today serves to aggravate those passions with most of our citizens so that theyre leaving in either a red or a blue state rather than part of a single indivisible union. Defenders also claim that present system helps protect small population states in rural areas from come to it nation by Large Population states and urban areas, in fact, candidate overlook most states large and small and instead focus most of their time it seems to me campaigning in only a few of the socalled swing states. Also it has been argued that the Electoral College serves to correct poor decisions by voters at a time when they were relatively ill informed because of nationwide communications were poor, literacy rates were low and the nations political system was undeveloped. Today they, of course, we live in an era of ensubstantiate mass communication, about high literacy rate, and robust and sophisticated political system. Most importantly i want everyone in this room to understand that todays forum is not an isolated event. Rather, it is for the ongoing process that could lead to change and reform whether that change will come through a constitutional amendment and agreement between the states compromising 270 more Electoral College votes or a subsequent interstate approved by congress. I cannot say and probably none of us can. Each of these options presents important Political Legal questions and i forward to exploring them with you today. But i can say that change only comes when we have discussions such as today when states experiment and take action and when the people become directly engaged. As a member who cares very deeply about the future of our democracy and the principle of one person, one vote, i very much intend to remain engaged in this moving and moving this issue forward and i hope that all of you will join me in that activity. I want to now recognize i think the distinguished gentleman from new york mr. Gerald natler worked on these and other constitutional questions thank you mr. Chairman. Pleased to join this forum on Electoral College and to hear from our distinguished panelists. I believe we must move away from the Electoral College as it currently oarptsing to assist that guarantee that winner of the popular vote actually becomes the president of the United States. That shouldnt really be considered radical idea. This is a matter of crew cial importance to the democracy an good news it is considered elementary in every other democratic country in the world only here is it thofl. The good news is that there are practical steps to take in our steps to make a real difference and how the president is selected. As you know popular vote winner differed from Electoral College vote winner three tiles in the 19th century. But last time then was in 1888. Electoral college did not differ from popular vote again until 2000. 112 years when it did make a difference so we as a nation got complaisant and figured it was irrelevant an didnt matter. But in the year 200016 years ago Vice President al gore won popular vote by half a million votes actually thats about 540,000, but lost in Electoral College after the Supreme Court stopped rehelicopter in florida and they wanted florida vote to then governor george bush by 437 votes. This year just 16 years later Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2 pent 5 million votes, 2. 5 million by could wanting and lost in the Electoral College. Electoral college seems to be getting more discounted from popular vote. We didnt have to worry about about it for 112 years and twice in 2016 and 2 and a half million votes difference and getting less democrat with a small d this time we got rid of the distorting influence from the popular will. Some proponent of the Electoral College argue it is necessary to protect smaller states by giving them an outside influence. However, the small states already protected in so far as pay need protection by having outside influence in the United States senate. By each small state each state guaranteed to vote. 600,000 people is same senators as california as i think 39 i dont know 25 whatever however many million, 53 is about 35 million people. And they dont need extra protection the Electoral College as well. In addition, the difference between the population of the small state and large states today is much bigger now than it was when the constitution was written. Weve gotten to the point where about 20 of the population of the United States select majority of the eyes senate thats ample protection to the signal states. You must also remember that Electoral College designed to enhance power of slave states. The sudden states although gave absolutely no right to slave had their slaves counted three fifths to volt recommendation in the house and therefore in the Electoral College. That motive although, obviously, no longer operative, should not influence anything today. The other reason the Electoral College was created was to protect us from democracy itself as well as from poor communications. Founder spear democracy and today we dont believe we need approximate from democracy and are to most of to a system that elects president by popular vote. Obviously, asking states that are benefited by Electoral College to vote three quarters twothirds in the senate an house, and three quarters of legislature is to ask a lot. But we dont have to do that. We have the National Popular voting issue. I was proud to play a role in ensuring that new york state a few years ago join initiative and ting makes sense to continue to pursue this method to enter Electoral College smooth. In this method is interstate compact face of 270 more electoral votes agree that once 270 votes were of states ratify their electoral votes is will be awarded to winner of National Popular vote. Seems to me the way to go, whatever it takes it is time to move forward to electoral vote and all of the votes in this country to choose our president. Let me say one thing a little bit off president elect trump said that well, maybe it was the half i think he said it himself when it was pointed out that he didnt have a mandate that he got two and a half million votes fewer than Hillary Clinton. He said oh, if were the popular vote i would have campaigned differently i would have gone to bigger states. He may be correct. Obviously, if the rule of the game were changed, campaigning would change and maybe that would have overturned that two and a half million votes and maybe not thats unknowable. But the fact is thats what ought to happen. Thats what ought to happen and majority were to rule this country as in every other country and democratic country. I cannot think of any real or practical reason any longer to keep the Electoral College so i hope proceed with reform and commend chairman for taking issue to call this hearing. I yield back. Thank you so much. I would like now to call on the distinguished gentleman from tennessee, the Ranking Member the Sub Committee on the constitution, steve cohen. Thank you mr. Chair. And thank you for calling this theory. It is important that we discuss these issues particularly as we look upon this past election. And the coming vote of Electoral College. I have introduced recently hjrez104 which would amend the article on the Electoral College and call for direct election. It is hard for people to fathom that such a large two and a half billion people voted for one candidate and she is not the president. Since i introduced my resolution, i have had quite a bit of comment on facebook, on twitter and later editor it was mazing that most of the people that have responded have been against the proposal and that they consider these are most of the people who support the candidate who was the pop list and drain the swamp but in their argument they argue that allowing direct election would be the tyranny of the majority. And that you would let the rabble rule. Well, its ironic that their president ial candidate was kind of just the opposite he was for the common man. He was for draining the swamp. And he was for changing things in that regard. The tyranny was majority they talk about is hard to fathom and oftentimes in our courts give us these rights although sometimes the bill of rights does and congress and legislature but mostly the Supreme Court that protects minorities from the tornny of tyranny and check they will out close before i give them a bruce willis adios they dont protect minority from the tyranny of the majority. So people seem to take their arguments based on the outcome. Im not pleased with the outcome. But i do know that intellectually, the Electoral College is a provision. It might have served well in the late 70s, and 800 and filled with their wonderful gentleman and i think the world of jefferson and he and other Founding Fathers were not perfect. And they did have the three fist compromise and deal with slavery and chose not to repeal it. They didnt give women the right to volt. And they didnt give people the right to elect directly in United States senators. They believed in their power and that there was an essence in america that should rule and continue to rule and like most groups that write constitutions and write law they dont like to see it change so they make it difficult to amend the constitution. And while they made it difficult and this will be a difficult process to achieve through constitutional amendment, jefferson said swhi quote im not an advocate for frequent change and law and constitutionings but law and institutions must be go hand had and hand with progress of the human mind as what becomes more new and discovery and new truce and manner and opinions change with the change of circumstances and institutions must advance also to keep pace with the tiles. We might as well require a man to still wear the coat that fitted him when a boy as civilize society to remain ever under the regimen of their an seis stores so they did understand it but they made it very difficult. Very difficult. Knadler talks about to get together to have their candidate, electors pledge to support the national vote. Other thing states could do is to have the electorate be by Congressional District are and when they are by congressional that would make it a little bit more democrat and better and candidates come to your state. They argue now that small states would be fair out and that you would have new york and california decide everything. Well, i think most of these people that write this dont want new york and california people to have any say whatsoever. But theres americans. Even if they live on a coast. And even if they live in two of our greatest states theyre still americans and vote should count the same as somebody in south dakota or wisconsin or montana and none of the president ial candidates go to those small states in reality all of the the campaigning is done in those battleground states which are not small states and where do they have their rallies in pennsylvania and virginia and florida and ohio, and big ten. Thats the small state. I yield back the blangs balance of my time. there isnt much balance left e learned that through jackson lee. [laughter] im pleased to recognize distinguished man from virginia bobby scott. Thank you mr. Chairman and for calling this a timely issue ass theres been a lot of discussion sense the Electoral College and popular vote wents the other. I think that discussion needs to be the couple of kind of anomaly one of the fateless elector ought to talk about whether or not to score by winning states or by a state popular vote and can be taken care independently. But i have been a little disturbed by just fixation on the matt mathematical curiosity to lose the popular vote, of course, if its close theres one can go the other way. But if youre winning by state then thought to be what you are considering. You could win the world series lose the first three games 100 and win the next four 10 and outscore 304. And still win the world series so nobody thinks theres anything curious about that because youre winning you won four games. And so i think we rather than fixate bsh pick sated on mathematical curiosity to win one and lose the other what would happen if you went to a straight popular volt and how that would change things and whether or not that would be good or bad. One of the i think thiss that id upon the out might not be a good thing is trying to do a National Recount in a very close election. My understanding in florida recount they found boxes of uncounted votes. Well, didnt, wasnt enough to change the direction, but if that was the National Recount you would have to count those empty box you can imagine a very partisan secretary of state certifying Election Results where more votes were counted than they had registered people. Now, what exactly how are you going to consider is that . Election laws are not the same all over the country. But one of the things that is about the Electoral College is requires you to get the state weighted basis in a majority of the state weighted by waited by population. A regional candidate doesnt have much of a chance. You could run up the score in one area it doesnt help you because youve got to get support you have to actually win states in a majority of the state. So what effect with a straight popular vote have on regional candidates and thrd Party Candidates . On the idea that you could win on a possibly without winning states very few states. Congressional election i would take a view from friend from tennessee you can win virginia, pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, and florida win all of those states chn end up with a substantial deficit on Congressional District because of german or elect a president based on Congressional Districts, and we wouldnt go there but generally how would it be different . Mr. Trump said that he could have won popular vote because he would have campaigned differently if thats how the score would be. He would have in states where he has a huge majority he would have just spent time running up the score and possibly change the is that a election but rather than recite curiosity to win one and lows the other i hope the panel would tell us how campaign would be different and whether or not that difference is a good thing or another. I want to thank our Witnesses Today especially my freshman roommate from College Professor kayzar were asking members of the panel to reduce their introductory comments to two or three minutes because it keeps getting larger and larger. Next is of california. Thank you mr. Chairman, and to this panel unfortunately im going to have to leave in a few minutes but i think this is a very important discussion. Coming from california, im mindful that the votes of my constituents count onethird as compared to a wyoming resident. And looking ahead for the stability of our democracy i dont think that is a sustainable molingsdz. That by people votes counts three times as much as theirs. That is aggravated by disparity and taxation where california for example pays more than it gets in services from the federal government where as some of the smaller states whose votes count three times as much as my constituents are now recipients of federal tax dollars. This is barely sustainable today. But if you look 50 years in advance where the bigger states are getting bigger and little states are losing population, i dont think we can sustain our american democracy by having the majority ruled by the minority. And so the question is how to fix this written in such a way that it is almost impossible to amend. There are two things that i think, i hope that panel will address and i will get a full report. One is doctor interstate compact idea and whether the compact can avoid interference by house of representatives in the senate, and the second is the issue of constitutional con convention we are three states away from calling for a Constitutional Convention and it is something that ive always been opposed to, you you cannot limit and bae Budget Amendment but ill say because for the second time in 16 years the people, the American Voters elected did not, in fact, become president. Rational people not the french are now talking about whether states could be separated from the u. S. Whether we should have a Constitutional Convention and i think as time goes that is apt to become more and configure an answer to preventing the majority from being ruled by the minority and i thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you, maam. I like now to recognize the gentleman from rhode island. Mr. David seslini. Thank you mr. Chairman and thank you for this forum on this very important subject and i want to just welcome our very distinguished witnesses to have study and written extensively on the subject of the Electoral College and welcome you and thank you for being part of this discussion and particularly welcome our newest colleague jamie i know who has done thinking on this and writing and we look forward to hearing comments, of course. Im proud to say rhode island is participate of the National Popular vote compact to ensure that participating states pledge their electoral votes to the candidate to win National Popular vote so im proud to be from a state that recognizes the importance of this. What i think is troubling for so Many Americans is, you know, we recognize this basic fund mental principle of democracy and that is the right citizens to elect their own leaders. And of course, within that is understanding that every vote must be counteds at no ones vote will count more than another persons vote. Theres sort of basic principle of democracy of course Electoral College distorts that in so many ways. And so i think one of the i think this is they find particularly challenging is it is very hard to explain this to young people who dont quite understand why it is that all of this stuff theyve learned about was one person, one vote and everyones vote count equally why that actually is not actually the way that we elect or president and then we have examples in our lifetime of people who have won the popular vote or the choice of majority of morns who then does not president and challenge had. And i think it becomes more difficult when we think about our work internationally. You know, we do a lot of work to promote democracy and a governess, and to be example to the world and of a variety of different way, and its hard to explain that we, in fact, in our own country dont have system that allow peoples votes to be counted equally in electing our own president so ting this has really serious raises concern of our democracy if we dont elect our own president by one person, one vote but it also impacts work, the good work we do around a the world so i thank you again mr. Chairman for this opportunity to discuss and really want to welcome panelist and thank you for the work youre all doing. Ill yield back. Thank you, i now turn to gentleman from georgia mr. Hank. I want to thank panelist particularly professor radskin we welcome you and this is a very important hearing. This is the first one that has occurred since 1997 so its been about 20 years since congress has addressed this issue with the hearing. And then their popular vote does not translate into big jury for the candidate that they voted for. This is antidemocratic. It is hurting our democracy. People expect more. People expect direct representation that is a fundamental principle that people expect. Not a whole lot of people pay a lot of attention to the elect Troll College system particularly since back in 1913 the constitution was amended so we can have direct elections of the United States senators. If we have not pass that amendment, people would this would be unacceptable as it is done except the bowl is where people come to the notion or come to the conclusion that their popular vote did not produce the winner of the president ial election so its time for eyes to get to work to change the system so that the peoples will is achieved and that is for them to be able to depend on their popular vote to win an election. So i am looking forward to the comments of the panelists and without ill yield back. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Incidentally, everyone on this panel is a member of the Judiciary Committee with the exception of mr. Gene green of texas. Bobby scott is an exmember. [inaudible] yes, yes, he is here by virtue virtue emeritus is the word im enough right now. Thank you so much. I am now going to turn to the gentlelady from california, ms. Judy chu. I want to think Ranking Member conyers for holding this important form on the Electoral College. In my home state of california, the popular vote dramatically went for secretary clinton. While some ballots are being counted as an opportunity to widen even further, recent vote tallies showed that clinton received a. 7 million posted trumps 4. 4 million. The difference comes out to 4. 2 million posted Hillary Clinton favor. What does that say about the electoral process and legitimacy of the results when one of the Worlds Largest centers of Economic Committee and innovation in one of the most countrys most populous state california favors the losing candidate by a margin almost able equal to the amount received by dave when a candidate. Obviously something has to be drawn about the Electoral College and i look forward to hearing from the panelists what can be done to change it, what a constitutional amendment or the National Popular vote compact change and i look forward to hearing from all the permalink on your thoughts regarding the subject. Thank you very much, judy. We now turn to the gentleman from texas, mr. Gene green. Mr. Chairman, we hold a law license. Thank you for having this hearing. I represented there urban district in houston, texas and my colleague and i are neighbors in houston. I had the honor of representing a district that is about 76 predominately hispanic in our Community Mexican american northeast and south accused him. Our comments at home is my vote when we talk about people voting, your vote counts. Well, it doesnt count in our district or president. Hillary clinton carried our district over 70 and yet no matter how many more people we turned out would not make a difference in the electoral votes from texas. This is not the first time it introduces resolution. After 2000 i introduced it in a number of years and i was hoping this would happen again but we see whats happened. Thats whats frustrating. Last month secretary clinton and senator kane receives 72 of the vote. 43 statewide make the closest race for Vice President in 20 years. A hundred of those votes, all 38 went to donald trump and governor pence. Naturally, secretary clinton is currently leading mr. Tron by 2. 7 million. The electoral votes i dont hold out hope that there will be any change and not. The Electoral College has outlived its usefulness. We know the history of that with a lot of compromises like we do every day in congress. It may not last for 100 years, much less 200 plus. Nowadays i think we have to be able to have people count whether in houston or urban new york reuben Central Valley, california that may be predominately republican. Thats why i think the other total colleges we can trust the people to vote for members of the house by a majority. We changed inside of our state legislators select your u. S. Senators, we changed it will be majority vote 1913. We can trust the people with electing the majority in the United States. Mr. Chairman, ill submit my full statement into the record but i appreciate the time. Thank you, sir. And now we have the distinguished on a lady from texas, ms. Sheila jackson lee. Pleased to recognize it. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much. I thank you for your courage for holding this hearing and those of you present as well as id like to mention the congressional progressive caucus because we are joined together as my colleague from texas side, voices can be extinguished and our silence to the Electoral College structure, which i joined with the number of voices and asking for its abolishment. Let me also say that i will be calling for official hearing both in the house and senate. I hope there will be sufficient courage to go ahead and address what i think is an indictment on a democratic system of which the world looks to the United States for his integrity. I would offer two examples that elections have consequences on the one of which is in 1988, Samuel Tilden and of course we know that was the compromise of which fell on the backs of freed slaves who were at that time going through the reconstruction. What happened is the south rose again and the oppression of African American freed women would not turn upside down. We lived a life of poor into the 1900s because of that compromise. Elections have consequences. In addition as we see today in an election where the headline now reads, if i may indicate that headline, Hillary Clintons margin is about to surpass all the charm for in 12 states combined. But the real idea is if you would the consequences of a waiver as long as a standing rule about the utilization of the military and civilian leadership being shoved on the floor of the house. We see the threat of the repeal of the Affordable Care act. We see potential for cuts in medicare and medicaid. I hope in your discussion that you will think of these things are very close. To explore the history, purpose can it be order, please . To explore the history, purpose and continued utility of the Electoral College. And to address the question of whether this comports with the rule of law and our cost additional framework of equality for all and the bill of rights. And i would equally want to hear from the witnesses if i could to reflect on the National Popular vote interstate compact versus a constitutional process. Im excited about the compact. I think its a winnable one, but we want to do it in a way that embraces americans regardless of their party affiliation. The shoe is on 12016. You can always be on another for the another time. The knowledge congressman raskin and thank you for your leadership. With that, i yield not. Thank you for your brevity. I appreciated. We also want to acknowledge and welcome jean jackowski of illinois and the one and only gwen moore of wisconsin or bust with us. We are going to move to her many witnesses who have been very patient with this. We are asking you to limit your own remarks to three minutes and we are going to begin with professor jamie raskin, constitutional law professor and one who seeks to join the House Judiciary Committee as soon as possible and we welcome you here, professor raskin. Turn on your microphone. You told my secret to the whole world here come the bs would be a great honor to join me there and hello to the distinguished members of the district committee. I see three basic problems with a way president ial elections or conduct it today. The campaigns themselves are not democratic. As congressman cohen was saying. The second is the institutions are not republican. The third is that the results are not the juror terry buried in plurality. There is a practical solution under way as congresswoman jackson lee said. It arises not surprisingly from the movement to the people in the states. Members start with this. Campaigns are not democratic and cared or could think about what it means from the standpoint of your district. One person, one vote. And the person who gets the most votes wins. Thats how we elect governors in u. S. Senators, council members, mayors, everybody except for the president of the United States. And sensei if we do it the way we elect governors and senators, some people are not going to get any attention in the process. Can you imagine running for governor and say im only going to go to two or three of the eight Congressional Districts in my say. It just doesnt make any sense. Our president ial campaigns are different. Consider 2016. There were not for more than a dozen states in play, meaning People Living in 38 states, the vast majority of us never saw competitive camp gaining in our state. We belong to be untrendy ignored and forgotten group of americans whose political interests and desires are taken for granted in campaigns. People in three of the countrys four largest states, texas, california and new york state blue are bypassed completely. No rallies, no brainstormed speeches coming to tv ads come in a field often says, no campaigning except on recent events to export to other states. That is not only undemocratic, its bizarre. The Electoral College must then work for the small states if not for big ones. In 2016 in our most recent collections, 12 of the 13 smallest states, those are three or four electors have been total flyover country. Hillary clinton did not spend any time, money or resources in the small red states of north dakota, south dakota, montana, alaska, idaho and donald trump expends your resources living in the small states of rhode island, dead where are the district of columbia. Of the 13 smallest states, on the New Hampshire rd blessed by the primaries that tracks campaign visits and budget in field offices and so on. All told the dozen states have the same population as ohio. Because of the two senatorial bonus to the terrace, they actually have 40 lakh as compared to ohio state team. Other president ial candidates spend tens of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of staff hours in ohio coming to spend essentially to your resources and time fighting in a small states except for New Hampshire because it happens to have an equivalency of democrats and republicans. Candidates dont put a big states are small states. To go to swing states and wouldve been the lucky dentist if the lucky dentist if they go to the big ones. Two thirds of the general election appearances staged by the clinton and trump take a tip place in only six days. Florida, north carolina, pennsylvania, virginia and michigan. A most every single appearance and events by the campaigns have been in just 12 states. The vast majority of americans were simply left on the sidelines of this had the predictable effect on voter turnout. In 2012, swings they thought ninepoint higher voter turnout in the states, which makes sense because the reason people go to vote is because someone just said. Are you back to gavel me . You are. I wanted to respond to something congressman scott asked. And they say this about the National Popular vote plan if i can. This is the way that major institutional political changes that happen in our country. The states do it first. We had another undemocratic filtering institution which state legislatures appoint u. S. Senators. The way we dealt with that and delegate to the people to decide. Enough of them felt the momentum for a constitutional amendment. I believe if we were more than halfway there, when we get there we will do it for one or two around. Very clear that it worked and then well go ahead and amend the constitution to abolish the Electoral College. Thank you very much, professor, member of Congress Jamie raskin. Our next witness is from yale university, teaches constitutional law, clerked for stephen breyer, now it just us, but he clerked for him in 1984 when he was a judge. Hes won awards from the American Bar Association and has been cited in over 30 cases before the United States Supreme Court. Welcome, professor. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Its an honor to be here. I think it was mentioned that there is a hearing on the Electoral College in 1997 and i remember testifying at that hearing and expressing some skepticism about the Electoral College and i remember representative scott about my skepticism. Here we are again. Had to president ial elections in the meantime im representative scott, i warned you. In fact i dont believe the current Electoral College as a partisan skew and indeed one of the things to be said on behalf of reform if its not a partisan measure. In 2001, i posted something on the internet that asserted a fantasy, a dream about how we could have direct election as a practical matter without a constitutional constitutional amendment which is very difficult and that was an early prototype of what became the National Popular vote. I shared jamies view that at best the National Popular interstate compact is a way station is a waystation towards a more permanent solution should be a federal constitutional amendment. I think the analogy that was just made to how states and provides direct election of senators prefer the constitution is formally amended to codify that one workaround is just right one and that the way to think about the National Popular vote interstate compact. I actually think that Reform Movement which i was sort of an early proponent does have some technical problems with it. If we could talk about but those are, it would require some legislators fix this. Why should we try to move towards Something Like that. The idea thats been expressed so well is an idea of one person, one vote that everyones vote counts equally and therefore everyone is a swing voter, whether youre an urban voter in houston, texas or rural voter of the Central Valley of california, whether youre a swing state are not swing state cannot run as a swing voter and it will voter. Thats the great democratic ideal. Its not just in a deal that is true of countries around the world. Its a deeply american idea. That is how we pick every governor in america. The governors than any president in 48 of the states have four year terms. They are not like prime ministers. They have the topaz, pardon pants, become president by a president ial candidate. We have a one person one vote idea for them. We dont have a problem with a thirdparty problem for a recount problem. We dont use Congressional Districts are legislative districts. It works for every governor. It can work in america. Thank you very much, mr. Chair. Thank you very much. We now turn to our next important witness, the author of six books. Professor of law, professor jack rakove, we welcome you as a Pulitzer Prize winner. The thank you, mr. Chairman. I will try to speak as quickly as they can. I would like to make three basic points about the origins and the evolution of the Electoral College and 10 permitted to Say Something very briefly about the idea of a National Popular vote. First, we should not give the framers of the constitution more credit than they deserve for, together with the Electoral College did the end of their deliberations. We do need to cut them some slack. There was no precedent available in their Political Science for a National Republican executives. More important the framers adopted the Electoral College not because the most attractive alternative available, but because it was the least to alternative available. There were decisive objections in congress to make the primary choice. The framers assumed the people atlarge will often scattered their votes among an array of every candidate making a decisive choice possible. If the legislature would deprive the president of the political independence of framers which i must do is restrict it to a single term which they oppose. The appeal to the president ial electors system that combines proportional representation of the firstround of voting with equal state boat in the second change it from many framers expected but often occur. On the crucial question of who they would be, how they would be appointed and whether their votes to be legally bound, framers defaulted the entire problem to the states. Sac area, as soon as contested elections began, the shortcomings of the framers expectations became another bowl. Had. Had there been a popular election in 1800 Thomas Jefferson were viable candidates, it wouldve been decisive. As contested elections began, the pretense without a disinterested citizens immediately evaporated. They always were and never will be creatures of their parties. The Political Parties are and how to control his individuals and also begin next are maintained with the rules of their appointment between 1796 may 200 comes to offer rules from calculations of stars an advantage. The result of the process of development of winner take all state wide system which treats every state is a political unit that its electorate is divided into nearly equal political ads. This is a thirdplace original history of the origins and evolution of the Electoral College not something we need to admire her feel bound to obey. I join with many other critics of the standard criticisms of our Current System. It violates the fundamental rules that every vote should get the same wherever its cast. The existence essentially as demographic and many members would be better served to both parties and incentives to turn out voters in every state. Two additional criticisms or does that merit further attention. First come in the last presidencies have all suffered serious crisis of legitimacy in the no question the presidency of donald trump will share the same name. Multiple explanations for these attacks on the legitimacy of president ial authority of the recurring country divided in red and blue states contribute to a pervasive sense of national division. The president elected by truly National Election will not only solve this album but will certainly help to mitigate it. Second, any attempt to mitigate has to think critically about his relationship to the federal system. This question it does reflect the existence of the state as autonomous political communities. Reflecting that status is not the same thing as protecting it. Many insist the existence is somehow dependent on its retention. Federalism authority between the National Government and members of Congress Play and represent american issuance. I skimmed the president ial election not nothing to these mechanisms and advocates for popular election. If i could make this point briefly, this is something id love to hear the committee explained to me. I do not understand how the National Popular vote is thomasa based initiative can possibly escape the compact clause of article i section 10. Once you are there come you are back to article v amendment. If you want to do with this issue there is no choice but to win the article v rout and coming up a strategy for doing it. Thank you and i apologize for taking a few more seconds. Our next witness the alexander case are, whose boat by both the American Historical Association and the Historical Society and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize award and we are fortunate to welcome you to this committee for this discussion, sir. At the pleasure and honor to be here and i take the liberty of calling the attention of the members to a forthcoming book i have with the app title, why do we still have the Electoral College . I went to use my two minutes to Say Something a little differently than my colleagues have said and i very much enjoys the case that many members have made about the need to abolish the Electoral College and replace it with a National Popular vote in one way or another. The cases that made very soundly. One small piece of arithmetic that must rethink there are just very rare and then when the gap between popular and electoral votes could have been. On 17 other occasions in addition to the five, 17 occasions when 75,000 votes or fewer would have produced the same outcome of the loser of the popular vote winning the election. It is not such a rare event. That aside, let me make a few other points on separate issues. First guess it is very difficult to amend the constitution and yes the Electoral College has been extremely unpopular. I think it is now close to it as an resolutions introduced into congress. We should remember on seven occasions, such a resolution in on two occasions in 1821 and 1970 was approved by one branch of government and lost by only a whisker in the other branch. Its not in his roommates about task. The reasons why this was never quite happened our many complicated, but let me mention on numerous occasions the perceived partisan in chairs of members of congress and elsewhere have triumphed over not only the public interest, but over there on previously articulated views. And on a number of these occasions that i can go into this, it turns out that they are perceived partisan interests were mistaken are shortlived. Also i want to mention that its not simply the case that the Electoral College with can be up in the world of slavery, but that the politics of race and conflict have been absolutely instrumental to preserving the elect are all college. One more point about the National Popular vote. It is frequently invoked by opponents of reform that the small states will never go along with change. In fact, there is precious via the statistical evidence does not have the two abdicated at the National Popular vote in the 20th century are John Pastorius of rhode island and William Langer are the various state of north dakota. On the National Popular vote under state contract, i agree with my colleagues here intending to see it as a waste nation. One of my concerns is that ink and interstate compacts such as the one drawn up is inherently unstable because states can withdraw from it. They cannot withdraw six months before an election. It is precisely the instability and gamesmanship which bedeviled the operation of Electoral College in the allocation between the 1790s and the early 1830s when states gamed the system depending on the partisan interests. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, professor keyssar peer or next witness is representative bob someone and we welcome him here. He is one of the first witnesses to come this afternoon. He received numerous awards and has authored a book on the constitution entitled reclaimed liberty. Welcome, sir todays hearing. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me move this back. I am state representative bob thorpe. I served as chairman of the House Committee on education, Higher Education and an honor to address your committee and to lend a state perspective to this discussion. In 2016 i was one of 150 republican legislators to sponsor the National Popular vote interstate compact. This bill helps solve problems with a way that candidates campaigned for president and how do govern after the action. Is consistent with federalism to elect electors. Federal actions change or eliminate the system in an appropriate and most likely impossible to achieve this would require Todays Congress to impose an amendment to the u. S. Constitution. That said, article ii section one grants the state Legislature Authority to address shortcomings. Far too many American Voters are left with when the president of the United States. The president ial campaign 2016 occurred in just 12 of our states will 13 states were largely taken for granted. Typically our ground states had much greater states like arizona. This distorts federal policy and can cause problems both during the campaign and when governing. Mr. Trump one clear fact the rate under the systems current roles that did so in part by making the same kind of promises every candidate makes. He promises to keep his hand on Social Security and to care for the battleground state in florida. He offered protectionist policies with voters in pennsylvania and michigan. They were narrowly crafted to meet specific groups and places and not yet the nation as a whole. Arizonas 11 electoral votes cannot counter the political influence the battleground state voters coming in a voter from arizona or any other state should be valued as much higher president from florida or ohio. During the last president ial elections commit 10 small states receive no campaign during the general election in the lead up to the 2012 president ial Campaign Battleground state of ohio received 48 visit to load. Ohio has the same number of people attend small states combined. Why should ohio get that much more attention than small states. State driven or firms that the National Popular vote small states enacted with general interest and permanent promise during the president ial elections. They based reform such as the National Popular vote are better used for arizona current state is law. The framers of the constitution provides states with the authority to change the way it was awarded in states like massachusetts have already used this authority 13 times and of iran for congress to strip away granted authority from the state. The National Popular vote contact achieves three important roles. Preserves the electors in the last of state legislators to continue to play federalist checksum the president and guarantees the president presidency for the candidate who wins the most popular vote in all 50 states and the district of columbia and addresses the real shortcomings of the Current System and makes every voter in every state be old and politically relevant during the president ial elections. The Electoral College is not broken. However the wave function is a winner take all rule is problematic for future president ial elections and has the ability to make every vote in every state matter. Thank you, mr. Chairman, coud i have five more seconds . How about for . Four will do it. If i could give a personal perspective on the state of arizona where we only have 710 of our plant in private ownership. If i could repeat back could repeat that come repeat that cant arizona only has 17 . What does that mean . It means greatly reduced property tax, but also representation here in this body and representation when it comes to electoral vote. In comparison to the eastern states, the western states have a huge problem been equally curated when it comes to president ial election. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Your point is well taken, but i notice you exceeded the time allotted by at least three seconds. Thank you very much, sir. I now turn to a representative as state representative who worked formerly for then congressman Bernie Sanders and served four terms in the vermont budget nature and said on the board of National Popular vote inc. Welcome to rp and all. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im proud to tell you that im about to take a seat. Congratulations. [inaudible] and much of the research that went into the book that explains the National Popular vote. It is my interest in change which has left me supporting the Electoral College. The deeply critical of the winner take all rule, which is in fact the state that produces the red blue map that we are so familiar with. As you know, the constitution does give states exclusive power. I will try to use my time to cover points not paid. In addition to all the operations and president ial election which favors sophies date in such a small portion of our country, weve not covered governance. But in fact, sitting in the white house, president s who are interested in reelection barring getting the own successor into office, to place an enormous preference on the battleground state and this is important if you look at disaster declaration of battleground states get more money when they get done. They get more no child left behind waivers. Many examples come even battleground state with visits from members of the president ial cabinet. I think that it goes well beyond election day to. Coming from vermont, others here have mentioned this small state the myth that small state benefit the Electoral College today and i would echo that. But i do want to talk about the idea that we would be new york, chicago, l. A. To control the election. That is complete mythology. One sixth of our country this in urban centers. One sixth of our country lives in rural parts of the country. Two thirds of the country are suburban and we can look. We dont have to guess. We can look at how president ial campaigns have been today in battleground states. States were every vote is equal and the person with the most votes wins. Ohio in 2012 received almost 30 of the camp and have been in ohio. The four biggest cities account for the population. They enjoy 52 of the campaign rallies. The second metro areas, which accounts for about 23 of the state enjoyed 23 of the campaign and the 53 Rural Counties count for 25 of the population and got 25 of the campaign amendment. We can see that campaigns will reflect exactly the structure of where the population was. Nobody will be left out when it is about margins everywhere. In my state of vermont, you get in your car and drive to New Hampshire. This is absurd. Under popular vote, will not be the center of attention that they will have a role to play. We will talk to her neighbors and stimulate the discussion and try to peek out another thousand votes her preferred candidate to make up for the margin state behind. Quickly its been mentioned that we consider firstly the problem was that if a couple full. We would trade 12 battleground states for some 20 battleground districts if you would magically have it everywhere. Secondly, there is no reason why it would necessarily spread because the morse case became an board with the district system would acted damage the remaining winner take all state. This is sort of a self halting reform. Faithful selectors are quickly mentioned. The rear their heads. Theyve never have changed the outcome of an election and if were really worried about that, states have the power to remove back. We talked about recounts. Today we are seeing it right now. You cannot effectively have a recount for our Current System. This is an area where congress does have power because you have authority over the count and there are proposals that have come forward that would prove that. We should not pretend under popular vote a recount would be possible. It is not workable today. Let me just say the compact clause. National popular vote is an interstate compact and has a precondition before it takes effect of the majority of lecturers. There is a very active debate about whether or not our compact requires approval to congress. In fact, k. Five, the most recent u. S. Steel. Its very consistent that case law suggests that unless an interstate compact infringes on federal authority, there would be no need for congressional approval. We believe the interstate compact is all but obviously taking of state power to Supreme Courts called this plenary power. And we would come to congress seeking approval at a time when states represented 270 lakh shares in the majority of congress have enacted this bill simply look forward to working with you. I will leave it there and i think the members for their time. Thank you very much, sir. Our last person, tomas meal neale will not give an Opening Statement that is available as a resource to it or any members question that may arise. With that, we want to begin members of the panel and its my pleasure to recognize representative david scott of virginia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Most of the comments, virtually all the comments are based on the mathematical curiosity that in a close election the Electoral College and the popular vote may not agree. If youre counting electoral votes, that is which account, just like in the world series you can still win. We heard a lot about the swing states. One thing about a swing state and citizens who and citizens you have in the bag and not to get close to 270. Youre going to spend our time on the last couple is dead, just like if the president is trying to get a bill passed, posted 218 on the house, a handful of members get all the attention. 51 senators get up to 46, 47. Both one senators look at all the attention. That assumes you have in the back enough to get you close. You have to be able to carry state that im out on the weighted basis of 270 electoral votes off of the country. If you do not have that come the swing states dont have any meaning at all. If you can get credit for running up the score, rather than spending your time getting 4951 and a swing state, is that a good chance or a bad chain and what candidates would be a lot good . The idea youll do a National Recount is absurd. Youre not going to be able to do a National Recount. Youre going to have state secretaries of state if you dont trust any further than you can throw them coming up with numbers that are just not credible and what are you going to do in that situation . Different states have different election laws. They are casting vastly different kind of those. But again, campaigning strategy, how would the campaigning strategy desk or on a popular vote and does that change good or bad and what would get elected . If you have a candidate strong in just one region, one begins to were three people strong in the region, you dont have that now because they fear regional candidate, you dont have a credible shot at 270. Without you a good change or a bad change and what kind of candidates would be a lot dead . Would that be better for the country or worse . Thats the focus id like to see. You can win one of those other. Would you like any one of our witnesses to respond . Now that the questioners is asked questions, well get answers to the question. I turned out to the distinguished gentlelady from texas, sheila emily. Jackson lee. I come away from this hearing with the solution that is going to be a tough fight, but it is a worthwhile fight and i believe it has to be done. I still go back to the historical fixture at the Electoral College is or the underlying premises the lack of trust of the American Population at that time. And their capacity to a lack the leader of the nation albeit small or smaller at that time. And so, mr. Keyssar, one thing i wasnt sure what you are saying but i want to correct an interpretation the Electoral College was born out of slavery. I obviously know that it was not started in 1888. It was started before that. I think you misheard me. What i said was that elections have these. One of the consequences was the unfortunate compromise between hayes and tilden. Told in getting the popular vote and by the compromise of mr. Hayes getting to be the leader of the free world, they received a bonus of free movie of the Union Soldiers and the firewall that protected that protected the southern opportunities for freed slaves who were then governor said that under his congress people. My analysis was elections have come acquaintances of the individual with major cuts in medicare and medicaid, a tax system that will break the backs of most working americans. Elimination of the Affordable Care at how this seemingly ignoring conflict of interest and also working to undermine laws that have a separation of military and civilian. I wanted to make sure i clarify that i didnt associate the Electoral College was slavery. What i do want to ask i would like mr. Amar and mr. Rakove if i have a correctly. I think mr. Keyssar made the point about the fractures of the National Interstate contract. Number of the dead and i want to thank the gentleman from arizona. It is not a partisan issue and that is the point that we should make very clear. It seems that way now but its not a partisan issue. If we ultimately get what we might desire five, 10, 15 years from now, if the popular vote rules, may be our only challenges will be what they counted and we have to accept would have been. Id be interested born toward land the value of a 50 state can pay in some way, shape, form or fashion, campaigns will get around to doing work. But i think you have a greater chance if you rely on the popular vote for candidates to say im going to try to get the vote up or where i can get the vote and speak to national issues. The constitutional premise that the only way to do it is the amendment if you had to a constitutional work or dont work about the fractures and my last voyage is the partner a young man whose now press conference on one nation, one vote. I think we should think about young people. He is taking his frustration and a nonprofit which he sold drawing on people around the nation to talk about one person, one vote. Weve got to think about the political aspect, how you are bitterly dousing hopes and dreams of a Younger Generation that are literal. Bufo. Your vote counts. You helped elected president or someone or not. That is going to be the Larger Population of voters. What are we telling them after this election despite whether numbers were up or down were heavily weighted by boat. I think we will have to have any third and i welcome your thoughts on this point. I yield back. Thank you so much. I now turn to the distinguished gentleman of georgia, mr. Hanks john in. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Elevates an alpha particularly from professor rakove and also professor keyssar the answer to this question, which is to what extent in americas history of slavery shaped the development of the elect to college and were there any other historical concerns or injuries that motivated the framers to establish the indirect selection of the president and Vice President and chief those conditions and could turn still looks to us. Thank you, sir. Is there someone going to respond to this . Everyone, starting with our first witness. Ill try to actually engage all of them. There are answers to some of the specific questions. Candidates will cover. He changed the rules. The claim is that to the states. We have governors that have big cities and rural areas states called california and texas and i dont think they have actually campaigned in ways that should make us anxious about using that template nationally. Now there are recounts in states. California is a really big state. You have to manage your recount. I share representative scots concerned that a National Recount raised his sons issues. Let me tell you that in 2000 it was clear nationally who won the popular vote. Al gore won by half a million votes and yet we had to do recount in three different states. Florida, new mexico and New Hampshire. Under the current, lets take the most recent election. It is clear who won nationally is actually less than completely clear who won in michigan or maybe wisconsin or maybe pens of age. We are going to have recounts either way in recent history in fact a national has been clear. The states have been clear and here is where i agree with representative scott completely. If you actually have a National Popular vote, you would need a National Recount system and national oversight. You cannot leave it to the secretaries of state and that will require congressional oversight whether or not the compact strictly speak being requires congressional oversight on your pecans to tuition and professor rakove thinks it doesnt matter they be that it doesnt. Im of the constitution as a practical matter the system will not work without congressional oversight because they tried again but it also subways. They may not participate in recount. They may not be helpful. They may come in and out as professor keyssar mentioned. You need oversight and i say that to you all with due respect is one of two people whose brainchild, the National Popular vote interstate compact was emerged from two ideas in infinitely of dean and Professor Robert bennett at the Northwestern Law School inures truly back in 2001 and way back when i saw the promise that it but there are these technical problems in the system will amount work without the congressional oversight which will require National Recount possibilities and that is the reason to say thats different from the governors. Point taken. Finally, it is not a partisan masher and im delighted that we have republican as well as democrats here testifying. In 2004, john kerry couldve easily have yet he had more popularity and ohio. 60,000 changes hands in ohio. He went the elect roh college while losing the National Popular vote by 3 million. I dont think theres a partisan skew today. Thats why i was joking earlier. There would be a partisan skew if we went to Congressional Districts. If we went to stay proportionality printouts to the system to the Republican Party in ways that i could go in to. Right now it is not particularly partisan. We have vibrational candidates who dont have them for governors of california and texas and pennsylvania. We actually do have had for the Electoral College. Strom thurmond and george wallace. We have done more for the Electoral College then for states because the Electoral College fraction International System and even if you cant win nationally, you can be a spoiler in throw things into the house of representatives and change the whole outcome in either kingmakers with a bigger problem with regional candidate spoilers, whether mcmullan arthur manor John Andersen then we have for governors. On slavery, one point even though the question was addressed to me, the role slavery played is not merely at the founding of philadelphia, but in particular with the amendment that the system after two election in which jefferson ran a good advance of the southerner when the south both times. The constitution was amended. The 12th amendment in the shadow of what was obvious to slaverys view without the extra electoral votes created by slavery. John adams was the second election to 13 asked her electoral vote. By fred jack rakove and shaking his head that i can tell you thats at every supporter says including people in this house who actually say 13 electoral votes because of slavery. He changed the rules have changed the game. The candidates wouldve can indifferently and all the rest. The biggest role that slavery plays actually in the 12th amendment in your Electoral College is not the one created at philadelphia because he voted to votes for president. Theres a separate vote for president to Vice President. Thats the 12th amendment extended slavery looms. Large. Theres a whole book on it called me for president and its actually not well known. It is just how large it will slavery played in those early election than in 1096 and 1800 southerners rant against northerners. Thank you so much. I wanted to notice that the chairman of the congressional black caucus, chairman gk butterfield has come in to the panel and we welcome him. He has been here before during this hearing and if he wanted to make any observations, we would welcome him at this time. [inaudible]. I do not understand the Electoral College. And weve got to have a very robust debate now in this country about whether or not its wise to continue with the Electoral College system or whether we want to move and gravitate towards the popular vote. I came here to listen because i dont have an appropriate answer for people who confront me on this back at home and so i look for to hearing as much as i can today. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Lets continue with the rest of the panel. Thank you, mr. Chairman. A number of questions have been raised by representative scott and i will try to deal with them fairly succinctly. Being a historian i dont believe in protecting anything. Thats one of the trademarks of our discipline. You have to prepare to be surprised in any given day. But i want to say a couple of things. As i wanted to imagine what would be the most likely change in our system if we had a National Popular vote to my way of thinking done by article v amendment rather than a potential unstable interstate compact. I assumed that if the parties were competitive nationally, which i believe they will continue to be, that the parties with at that point have a strong incentive to turn out the votes were ever there votes were. So they wouldnt just be hanging out in new york, la, chicago and so on. Parties would have to come up with a variety of strategies to mobilize. That will be more easy in the future than in the past. Social media gives you many more ways to reach voters. I think that would be a net public good. I think we have a stake in a democracy, and maximizing, not having to feel my vot boat is wd because if im a minority in a red state blue state or whatever. Thats point number one. Point number two i agree with others that instead of thing but how would you count individual states, if you had an National Popular vote there would be only one constituency. Lets call it the United States of america to come up with a convenient phrase, and under the times, places and manners, Congress Already has the authority to intervene and to determine how elections were to be conducted. Instead of having a chaotic set of voting systems and, of course, the butterfly ballot in West Palm Beach would be the classic example of this, a National Government already possesses the Constitutional Authority to determine what is the one best method of collecting votes. I guess you want to have a paper trail and so on. Instead of this chaotic system or state are free to do everything, you would have a basis for nationalizing the basis of which americans vote based on what weve seen in recent elections, i think that would be a positive development. The idea of the sectors differ florida whos also the chair of the bush 2000 Campaign Committee and responsible person to decide what to do by the florida recount, thats nuts. Maybe we need a Simple Service basis but i think that would be a net public good. To congressman johnson, about the history of slavery, we have spoken about it. Hes right in one sense. The threefifths clause is an important factor in the original construction of the Electoral College. I dont think it took place as it has torn primarily in the writing of the constitution or i dont think it took place in order to advance slavery. I think was part of compromises with the framers ran out of time and, they ran out of time and they built upon the whole set of compromises theyve made previously. The tricky part of this and were i take issue with others position is once you realize the Electoral College is therefore partisan manipulation and then on a statebystate basis you can write and rewrite the rules for maximum partisan advantage of what takes place, is that theres a whole set of rule changes. If you take the 1800 election as your test point you have to take into account all the other rule changes going on. The system was not static. There was no one model. The recent skeptical is if you look at the congressional results suspect the reason im skeptical compare what theyre doing in terms of running electoral rolls, the republican victory in 1800 was so dramatic basically the reverse and lopsided margin in the house of representatives. Thats the best index of why the American People worker if you go on that index as is the best marker of what popular sentiment was at a time with a variety of procedures for selecting, while the slave effect is important is not determinative or deposited in the way the professor suggests. Let me try to respond to several different issues, even if its this leads me to disagree with my old friends and roommates in pennypacker 25. [laughter] the honorable robert scott. First, i would like to note for this group a remarkable anniversary. We are exactly 200 years. It was in 1816 that a proposal for a National Popular vote was first introduced in congress. Exactly 200 years ago, and it was dismissed from consideration actually in part because of what it would do to the slave states. Turning to more recent matters, i agree with the response to congressman scotts comments. Campaigns would change. I think it would change in some ways that are not foreseeable bubut i think that you would see intensive action at a lot of places. I also think its reasonable to think that if you had a National Election we would have National Election rules of one sort or another. That would have been i realize in some quarters that would be controversy old, but i think youd get an National Uniformity of election rules. I do not regard this necessarily a bad thing. It seems to work in every other country in the world, that you have the same rules governing elections and all parts of the country. Im not quite sure why we would be ill suited to do that. I also think its the case that we might end up not with the more regionallybased third parties, which i think our advantage to buy the Electoral College we might end up with more ideologically based third parties across th the nation, ad that would be something to consider. And finally in response to congressman johnsons question about what were the other considerations going on in the minds of the framers in addition to slavery . Let me say two things in response to that. One is that there was this concern that a National Election which madison supported by the way, a National Election would not be logistically feasible and it would be hard to get candidates and known. That certainly is not an