National Popular Vote agreement is playing by the rules

Re: “If you can’t win, change the rules,” June 18 guest commentary

Wil Armstrong got a lot of things wrong in his recent essay against the National Popular Vote. We do, however, agree with his statement at the end when he wrote, “let’s follow the Constitution and play by the rules.” That’s exactly what the National Popular Vote interstate agreement does.

Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution says: “each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors ...” States have used that authority over our history to appoint electors in many different ways. The National Popular Vote simply requires electors from its states to elect the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes nationwide.

It is regrettable that we have to remind Mr. Armstrong and his organization of the plain language in our Constitution, as well as the fact that state governments can also pass laws without amending the Constitution.

The League of Women Voters began its support of a presidential direct election in 1970.

The late Sen. William Armstrong cast a vote supporting direct election nine years later. We have supported the National Popular Vote interstate agreement since 2006.

We do this because we believe every vote should be equal and every voter should be relevant. That is not the case under the current way we elect the president, but it would be under a National Popular Vote.

We urge readers to consult the Constitution and then vote YES on the National Popular Vote this fall.

Karen Sheek, Cortez

Editor’s note: Sheek is president of the League of Women Voters of Colorado.