By Jon Dougherty
Nevada’s Democratic governor delivered an unexpected blow against the American Leftists who are pushing to bypass the Constitution’s electoral college system of selecting presidents because they’re still ticked off Hillary Clinton couldn’t pull in enough states to beat Donald Trump.
On Friday, Gov. Steve Sisolak said he vetoed the legislation because he was concerned it could, and likely would, disenfranchise Nevada voters.
“After thoughtful deliberation, I have decided to veto Assembly Bill 186,” he said in a statement.
“Once effective, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could diminish the role of smaller states like Nevada in national electoral contests and force Nevada’s electors to side with whoever wins the nationwide popular vote, rather than the candidate Nevadans choose.”
He noted further, “I recognize that many of my fellow Nevadans may disagree on this point and I appreciate the legislature’s thoughtful consideration of this important issue.”
The Hill reported on the progress of the NPVIC movement to subvert the Constitution:
Fourteen states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation to join the pact, which will only take effect if a number of states holding the majority of the Electoral College’s 538 electoral votes join the agreement.
Colorado, Delaware and New Mexico all approved laws to join the initiative this year, bringing the pact up to 189 electoral votes — 81 short of the 270 necessary for it to take effect.
Attempts to get Nevada to pledge its six electoral votes to the national popular vote winner has failed twice, with attempts in the 2017 and 2009 legislative sessions failing to make it to the governor’s desk.
Earlier this month, the Nevada Senate passed the legislation would have brought the state into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact if signed into law.
The purpose behind the compact is to serve as an agreement between other states that have passed similar legislation to grant all of their electoral college votes to whichever candidate wins the popular vote, even if a majority of voters in their state did not support that candidate.
Talk about disenfranchising.
At present, all of the states that have signed on are solidly blue and as such are most likely to go for whatever Left-wing disaster the Democrat Party nominates. But consider: Californians used to support Republican presidential candidates; what happens in the future if they begin to do so again, only to lose their 54 electoral votes to a rival candidate (California is a compact state)?
It’s not clear the Nevada legislature has enough votes to override Sisolak’s veto, but even if it does, they may not want to alienate a governor they will need later to pass other favored legislation.
This story has been published with fewer ads for maximum reader experience.
- Follow Jon Dougherty on Twitter at @JonDougherty10