Letter: Death to North Dakota's Secret Election Act

Though it passed the North Dakota Senate 43-3, here's hoping the House gives SR 2271 — the Secret Election Act — the visible death it deserves.

This under-the-radar bill attempts to maintain the integrity of the Electoral College for presidential elections. However you feel about the Electoral College, this is not the way to do it. It is ham-handed, backhanded and rewards secrecy.

And now, at least one senator who voted for the bill is having second thoughts.

Sen Erin Oban, D-Bismarck, responded to my inquiry:

Oban said she was “unaware of the potential major implications of this. I am big enough to admit when I made a mistake and did not have as much information as I should have before voting yes.”

"I listened to the bill carrier . . . accepted the unanimous support of the committee’s recommendations, and looked through testimony on the bill, none of which opposed it.

"It is rare that I can’t defend my vote, but in this case, that’s where I’m at. I’m embarrassed that I didn’t do my homework on it and am hoping there is some opposition raised in the House to defeat it."

The law would prohibit any election official from releasing actual vote totals for the presidential election until the state's Electoral College members convene. Officials would be allowed to release info only on percentages.

This is totally opposite of the transparency and open government North Dakotans revere.

The measure's proponents are doing this to "thwart" an effort by the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to basically nullify the Electoral College and assure the winner of the popular vote will be chosen president, according to former State Sen. Curtis Olafson of Edinburg. States that sign on to the NPVIC compact promise to cast electoral votes for the candidate who tallies the largest national popular vote. So far, 15 states, representing 196 electoral votes, have signed on, and another few states and 74 electoral votes would reach the 270 number to pick a president. North Dakota won’t be one of those states.

According to testimony by Olafson: "If the compact member states don’t have a tally from every state in the country, their own compact language would prohibit them from determining the winner of the national popular vote.’’

SR 2271 wouldn't go into effect "unless and until the NPVIC reaches 270 EC votes within the compact," Olafson said.

This is just the type of through-the-backdoor, Machiavellian schemes to avoid in this era of turbulent elections and post-vote shenanigans.

Many North Dakotans favor the Electoral College, under the premise that it gives the state more power in selecting a president.

Republicans are especially opposed to the popular vote, so that would help explain their 40-0 shutout. But three of six Democratic senators -- Merrill Piepkorn of Fargo, Oban of Bismarck, and Richard Marcellais of Belcourt -- also voted yes. I received a response from Oban, but not from the other two.

The state Democratic Party sent me a transcript of Olafson's testimony and offered that the legislation was "more benign than it sounds."

Doesn't sound benign at all to me. I'm hoping the House sees it the same way.

Matt Gerszewski lives in Minot, N.D.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.