Press "Enter" to skip to content

Aug 15th: “A Civil Action to Democratize the Electoral College”

Asa Gordon is Chair of the D.C Statehood Green Party Electoral College Task Force; a member of the Green Party Black Caucus Organizing Committee; and is the founder and Executive Director of the Douglass Institute of Government (DIG).

On Saturday, August 15, 2009, in Massachusetts, Asa Gordon will be speaking about how to democratize the electoral college, and about his pro se work to try to achieve that end. More information about reforming the electoral college is: here.

“A Civil Action to Democratize the Electoral College”
Presented by: Asa Gordon
Event flier: here.
Sat. Aug. 15th, 2009  |    2 – 4pm
Oak Bluffs Public Library
56R School St. Oak Bluffs, MA 02557
Phone#: (508)-693-9433

Gordon vs Cheney/Biden is a civil action to protect the voting rights of presidential electors and the voters they represent. The Civil Action
Gordon vs Cheney was filed on July 28th, 2008, to commemorate the Century and Two Score years anniversary of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States to enforce
the Mal-Apportionment Penalty’ provided in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.


  1. Kimberly Wilder Kimberly Wilder August 14, 2009

    Peter, thanks for the great question…

    The lawsuit is against the two Vice Presidents in their capacity as President of the Senate. It started in 2008, when Cheney was VP, but would now affect Biden. The lawsuit is about how the VP should count (or not count) votes from electors to the Electoral College

    The premise is that the malaportionment penalty (a part of the 14th amendment of the Constitution) means that a state’s votes cannot be counted under certain circumstances, where they are disenfranchising people. In part, Asa says that a state is disenfranchising voters if they report their votes as “Winner Take All”, when in fact, they should report proportionally.

    Oddly, there are many states where there is absolutely no state law that says “winner take all”, but they do winner take all. People just kind of fake it and report it that way out of tradition.

    There is a 10 minute video of Asa which explains it pretty well at our youtube site:

  2. mvymvy mvymvy August 17, 2009

    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.

    The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law on how those votes are awarded.

    The bill is currently endorsed by over 1,659 state legislators (in 48 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.

    The National Popular Vote bill has passed 29 state legislative chambers, in small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon, and both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington. These five states possess 61 electoral votes — 23% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.