1-Sentence Description
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia).
3-Sentence Description
Under the U.S. Constitution, the states have exclusive and plenary (complete) power to allocate their electoral votes, and may change their state laws concerning the awarding of their electoral votes at any time. Under the National Popular Vote bill, all of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. 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).
1-Page Description
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia).
The bill has been enacted by states possessing 61 electoral votes — 23% of the 270 necessary to activate the law (Hawaii, Washington, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland).
The bill has passed 29 legislative chambers in 19 states (Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington).
The National Popular Vote bill has been endorsed by 1,777 state legislators.
The shortcomings of the current system stem from the winner-take-all rule (i.e., awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state).
Because of the winner-take-all rule, a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide. This has occurred in 4 of the nation's 56 presidential elections (and 1 in 7 of the non-landslide elections). A shift of fewer than 60,000 votes in Ohio in 2004 would have defeated President Bush despite his nationwide lead of 3,500,000 votes.
Another shortcoming of the winner-take-all rule is that presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, or organize in states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. In 2008, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their campaign visits and ad money in just six closely divided "battleground" states. A total of 98% went to just 15 states. In other words, voters in two thirds of the states were essentially spectators to the election.
The U.S. Constitution gives the states exclusive and plenary control over the manner of awarding their electoral votes. The winner-take-all rule is not in the Constitution. It was not the Founder's choice (having been used by only 3 states in the nation's first presidential election in 1789). The fact that Maine and Nebraska award electoral votes by district is a reminder that a amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not required to change the way the President is elected.
Under the National Popular Vote bill, all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded, as a bloc, to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes — that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538).
The bill has been endorsed by the New York Times, Chicago Sun-Times, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Sacramento Bee, Common Cause, and Fair Vote.
State polls (mostly taken in 2009) show strong support for a national popular vote (AR–80%, CA–70%, CO–68%, CT–73%, DE–75%, ID–77%, IA–75%, KY–80%, ME–77%, MA–73%, MI–73%, MS–77%, MO–70%, NH–69%, NE–74%, NV–72%, NM–76%, NY–79%, NC–74%, OH–70%, OK–81%, PA–78%, RI–74%, SD–75%, UT–70%, VT–75%, VA–74%, WA–77%, and WI–71%). Support is strong in every partisan and demographic group surveyed.
The National Advisory Board of National Popular Vote includes former congressmen John Anderson (R–Illinois and later independent presidential candidate), John Buchanan (R–Alabama), Tom Campbell (R–California), and Tom Downey (D–New York), and former Senators Birch Bayh (D–Indiana), David Durenberger (R–Minnesota), and Jake Garn (R–Utah).
Additional information is available in the book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote and at www.NationalPopularVote.com.
PDF
WORD
8-Page Memo
This memo discusses the most commonly raised issues.
PDF
WORD
620-Page Book
You can read or download, for free, our book
Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote, at
www.every-vote-equal.com.
"Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by Nationwide Popular Vote"
8 Editorials
Editorials from
New York Times (two editorials),
Chicago Sun-Times,
Minneapolis Star-Tribune,
Los Angeles Times,
Boston Globe,
Hartford Courant,
Sacramento Bee, and
Fayetteville Observer.
PDF
Discussion of Question of Congressional Consent
A
discussion as to whether congressional consent is required for the proposed interstate compact entitled the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote."
Discussion of Recounts under a National Popular Vote
A
discussion of how recounts would be less likely under a national popular vote for President than under the current system.
Discussion of Withdrawal
A
discussion of the hypothetical scenario in which a state might try to change the "rules of the game" between the November general election for President and the mid-December meeting of the Electoral College by withdrawing from the interstate compact entitled the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote".
1-Page "What People Are Saying" Flyer
Prepared Remarks at Initial Press Conference on February 23, 2006, in Washington
FairVote's Report on Presidential Elections Inequality
Lawsuit by Delaware and 11 Predominantly Small States in 1966 Against Use of Winner-Take-All Rule by Large Battleground States