re: New Mexico National Popular Vote Bill Headed to Governer's Desk

quote:

---

The notes from the convention seem to think it’s true.

---

You need to read the entirety of your own link. The debate taking place is whether the Executive could gain a second term by Congressional Appointment. It was not a debate on the Electoral College as a whole:

quote:

---

On reconsideration of the vote rendering the Executive re-eligible a 2d. time, Mr. MARTIN moved to reinstate the words, "to be ineligible a 2d. time."

---

quote:

---

Mr. RANDOLPH urged the motion of Mr. L. Martin for restoring the words making the Executive ineligible a 2d. time. If he ought to be independent, he should not be left under a temptation to court a re-appointment. If he should be re-appointable by the Legislature, he will be no check on it.

---

quote:

---

Mr. KING. did not like the ineligibility. He thought there was great force in the remark 8 of Mr. Sherman, that he who has proved himself to be 9 most fit for an Office, ought not to be excluded by the constitution from holding it. He would therefore prefer any other reasonable plan that could be substituted. He was much disposed to think that in such cases the people at large would chuse wisely. There was indeed some difficulty arising from the improbability of a general concurrence of the people in favor of any one man. On the whole he was of opinion that an appointment by electors chosen by the people for the purpose, would be liable to fewest objections.

Mr. PATTERSON's ideas nearly coincided he said with those of Mr. King. He proposed that the Executive should be appointed by Electors to be chosen by the States in a ratio that would allow one elector to the smallest and three to the largest States.

Mr. WILSON. It seems to be the unanimous sense that the Executive should not be appointed by the Legislature, unless he be rendered in-eligible a 2d. time: he perceived with pleasure that the idea was gaining ground, of an election mediately or immediately by the people.

---

So Madison is not debating whether to hold a national popular vote; he is debating whether the Congress should have the power to appoint the President to a second term.

His position:

quote:

---

Mr. MADISON. If it be a fundamental principle of free Govt. that the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be separately exercised, it is equally so that they be independently exercised. There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive shd. be independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should: A coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by some tenure, that will give him a free agency with regard to the Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the 1st. instance even with an eligibility afterwards would not establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted. He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself.

---

And, in fact, he clearly speaks of his hesitation of a vote-at-large and instead believes the selection of electors the best option: He states:

quote:

---

There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.

---

quote:

---

But your are just backing this up with?

---

Here is a good source; unfortunately, I can't quote directly from it but it clearly holds that "Madison largest critique of electoral reform was that it departs from the system laid out by the Constitution.

Madison's Views on Electoral Reform