Mississippi, electorial votes and confusion

[Comshaw]

According to this article Mississippi uses a system patterned after the federal electoral vote system to choose some of their state-level officers. One electoral vote is awarded to the candidate receiving the most support in each of the 122 state House districts. If no candidate wins both the popular and electoral vote, the state House chooses the victor.

Mississippi is thinking about doing away with this style of election. They are under pressure from an impending lawsuit that claims their electoral system violates the "one person, one vote" principle.

My confusion is this: At this time, because of the way the states do their electoral votes (all electoral votes from that state going to the winner of the majority popular vote) our federal electoral system, other than the provision in Mississippi that the candidate has to win both the popular and electoral vote, is pretty much a match for the Mississippi system.

So does the federal system, the way it is applied now, violate the "one person, one vote" principle? Should the application of it be changed to allow apportioning of electoral votes to reflect the popular vote? If not, does the Mississippi system violate the principle of one person one vote or not? And with the federal electoral vote system in place, is that principle even a valid consideration?

https://www.statesman.com/ZZ/news/20200704/mississippi-could-drop-jim-crow-era-statewide-voting-process

Comshaw

 

[HisArpy]

Several states, after Trump won the 2016 election, changed their electoral votes to one of apportioning the votes. AFAIK, that change has still yet to be tested but I'm pretty sure it's not Constitutional because, from what I remember off the top of my head, the Constitution doesn't allow for apportionment in it's language.


Other than for elections involving the president/VP which require the electoral college, the Constitution leaves the practical method of how to conduct voting up to the States. Whatever form or format the States decide upon is their choice.

The one person / one vote thing is a misnomer that attempts to subvert our Republic into a Democracy.

 

[Wrong Element]

So does the federal system, the way it is applied now, violate the "one person, one vote" principle? Should the application of it be changed to allow apportioning of electoral votes to reflect the popular vote? If not, does the Mississippi system violate the principle of one person one vote or not? And with the federal electoral vote system in place, is that principle even a valid consideration?

FYI, the Supreme Court is preparing to rule, probably this coming week, on the whole issue of whether so-called "faithless electors" are prohibited by the Constitution.

It's an interesting question, because if electors can do what they want, that sort of defeats the entire point of having an Electoral College — but electors exercising their own judgment is very much what the Framers intended.

 

[HisArpy]

FYI, the Supreme Court is preparing to rule, probably this coming week, on the whole issue of whether so-called "faithless electors" are prohibited by the Constitution.

It's an interesting question, because if electors can do what they want, that sort of defeats the entire point of having an Electoral College — but electors exercising their own judgment is very much what the Framers intended.

Precedent and historical examples support the electors casting their individual votes unfettered.

 

[jaF0]

My confusion is this: At this time, because of the way the states do their electoral votes (all electoral votes from that state going to the winner of the majority popular vote) our federal electoral system, other than the provision in Mississippi that the candidate has to win both the popular and electoral vote, is pretty much a match for the Mississippi system.

Only some states. In general, the Electors are not bound by the popular vote or even the will of the people. They're put in place by the parties which makes them more beholding to the will of the party.

This is why I want the process changed so that the people elect the electors. Or do away with the electors altogether and have an automated weighted that accounts for the popular vote on both the state and national levels.