So this is the bill that until last week, the majority didn’t even want to vote on, until the new AZ rep won her special election and makes them? Then it turns out they (almost) all agreed with her anyway? Amazing how things work in Congress.
Historically, the EC protected the women’s suffrage movement. In a straight NPV, you couldn’t allow progressive states like Wyoming to just double their electoral influence by letting women vote until conservative states like Massachusetts are ready to do the same.
Maybe the modern equivalent is ranked choice voting reforms. Under EC, it’s no problem for Maine to choose electors by IRV, and if other states see it working, they might follow. Under a NPV, or even the NPVIC, they’d be forced to revert to a plurality system so their votes could be added to the national total.
This might have been 20 years ago. Some civic organization, probably on Martin Luther King weekend, held a tribute honoring some famous black men. One of the most prominent famous black men they invited was actor James Earl Jones – reasonable enough so far. So they called him up to the stage to present him with his honorary plaque made out to James Earl … Ray.
Misinformation deserves no free speech protection.
However, what remedies are proposed in the event that a government official orders the removal of misinformation that later turns out to be a valid theory. Even if the evidence supporting the theory was unknown at the time of publication, if it was just a kook with a lucky guess, there should be some serious consequences for censoring accidental truth. Experts have been wrong in the past and might be wrong again.
My problem seems to stem from the fact that my searches are often obscure and commercial interests probably wish I was searching for something else.
Clay Higgins (R-LA), but I hadn’t heard of him before today so can’t say much about him.