Proposes a constitutional amendment to prohibit selecting electors for the President of the United States based on the national popular vote
The discussion around HJR95 indicates a split in opinions among lawmakers. Proponents of the bill argue that preserving the Electoral College is essential for maintaining the federalist structure of the United States, which they believe protects the interests of smaller states and ensures that all regions have a say in the presidential selection process. On the other hand, critics contend that this amendment undermines the principle of one-person, one-vote by not counting the will of the majority of voters nationwide, which could disenfranchise millions and skew representation.
HJR95 proposes a constitutional amendment that aims to prohibit the selection of electors for the President of the United States based on the national popular vote. This proposal is significant as it seeks to maintain the traditional Electoral College system, thereby impacting how votes are counted in presidential elections. The amendment would ensure that states continue to select their electors using methods that are consistent with the current framework established by the Constitution, thus preempting any shift towards a nationwide popular vote system.
The main point of contention surrounding HJR95 is the debate over the fairness and effectiveness of the Electoral College as a mechanism for electing the President. Advocates for changing to a national popular vote argue that the current system disproportionately favors certain states and diminishes the voting power of individuals in less populous states. They assert that a national popular vote would better reflect the collective choice of the electorate, whereas opponents maintain that such a shift would disrupt the balance of power and could lead to a focus on populous urban areas at the expense of rural voices.