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).

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).

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 passed 30 legislative chambers in 20 states (AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MI, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OR, RI, VT, WA) and is endorsed by 1,922 legislators.

In the recent 52–7 New York State Senate vote on the bill, Republicans supported the bill by a 22–5 margin (with 3 not voting) and Democrats supported it by a 30–2 margin.

The bill has been enacted by states possessing 73 electoral votes — 27% of the 270 necessary to activate the law (HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, WA).

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 (1 in 14 times). Furthermore, near misses are also common. A shift of 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 pay attention to the concerns of voters 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. Voters in two thirds of the states are essentially just spectators to presidential elections.

The U.S. Constitution gives the states exclusive control over the manner of awarding their electoral votes. Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution says “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….” The winner-take-all rule is not in the Constitution. It was used by only 3 states in the nation’s first election in 1789. Maine and Nebraska’s present-day district system is a reminder that changing the method of electing the President does not require a constitutional amendment.

Under the National Popular Vote bill, all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded 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 assures that every vote will matter in every state in every presidential election.

The bill preserves the Electoral College, while reforming state winner-take-all laws so that the Electoral College reflects the vote of the people in all 50 states (and DC).

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 are all favorable: AK–70%, AR–80%, CA–70%, CO–68%, CT–74%, DC–76%, DE–75%, FL–78%, 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%, OR–76%, PA–78%, RI–74%, SD–75%, UT–70%, VT–75%, VA–74%, WA–77%, WI–71%, WV–81%.

Our National Advisory Board includes former congressmen John Anderson (R–IL, I), John Buchanan (R–AL), Tom Campbell (R–CA), and Tom Downey (D–NY), and former Senators Birch Bayh (D–IN), David Durenberger (R–MN), and Jake Garn (R–UT).

Additional information is available in our book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote and at www.NationalPopularVote.com.

PDF       WORD

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.

The National Popular Vote bill consists of this 888-word interstate compact.

PDF       HTML

A detailed explanation of this legislation appears in chapter 6 of Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote.

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

A discussion of the constitutionality of the proposed interstate compact entitled the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote"; the historical appropriateness of the National Popular Vote bill; and the advantages of interstate compacts over constitutional amendments.

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."

A discussion of how recounts would be less likely under a national popular vote for President than under the current system.

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".

PDF

Prepared Remarks

PDF       HTML

HTML