Maryland Governor O’Malley Signs National Popular Vote Bill

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley today signed the National Popular Vote bill. Maryland thus became the first state to enact state legislation guaranteeing the Presidency to the candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states.

The National Popular Vote bill in Maryland enacts an interstate compact called the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote." Identical bills have been introduced by 305 legislators in 47 states around the country.

The favorable action in Maryland follows the passage of an identical bill by the Hawaii House of Representatives (35–12) and the Hawaii Senate (19–4). The Hawaii bill is now being considered by Governor Linda Lingle. Earlier in 2007, the National Popular Vote bill passed the Arkansas House and Colorado Senate. The bill is at various stages of consideration in a number of other states, as shown on our web site at www.NationalPopularVote.com.

The enactment of the legislation in Maryland came only 411 days after National Popular Vote held its initial press conference on February 23, 2006, featuring former Congressmen John Anderson (R-Illinois and later independent presidential candidate) and John Buchanan (R-Alabama-the first Republican elected to represent Birmingham), former U.S. Senator Birch Bayh (D-Indiana), Dr. John R. Koza (originator of the proposal), Barry Fadem (President of National Popular Vote), Chellie Pingree (then President of Common Cause), Rob Richie (Executive Director of Fair Vote), and Kirk Clay (Common Cause).

The Maryland legislation does not take effect in Maryland until states cumulatively possessing a majority of the electoral votes enact identical legislation. Maryland has 10 electoral votes. There are 538 electoral votes in total, and a majority is 270 electoral votes.

The New York Times endorsed National Popular Vote's plan by calling it an "an ingenious solution" that "Legislatures across the country should get behind." The plan has also been endorsed by the Chicago Sun Times, Los Angeles Times, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, and Sacramento Bee. The plan has been endorsed by Common Cause and FairVote.

The current system of electing the President has several shortcomings—all stemming from the winner-take-all rule that awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state.

Under the winner-take-all rule, candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the concerns of voters of states that they cannot possibly win or lose. A major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that voters in two thirds of the states are effectively disenfranchised in presidential elections because candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of “battleground” states. Candidates concentrate over two-thirds of their advertising money and campaign visits in just five states; over 80% in just nine states; and over 99% of their advertising money in just 16 states. The number of battleground states has been shrinking for many decades. The spectator states in presidential elections include 12 of the 13 least populous states (all but New Hampshire); 7 of the nation’s 11 most populous states (California, Texas, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Georgia).

Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide. A shift of 60,000 votes would have elected Kerry in 2004, even though President Bush was ahead by 3,500,000 votes nationwide. A shift of a handful of votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in five of the last 12 presidential elections. A second-place candidate won in 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000.

The Founding Fathers gave the states exclusive and plenary (complete) control over the manner of awarding of their electoral votes. The winner-take-all rule is not in the U.S. Constitution. It was used by only 3 states in the nation’s first presidential election. It is not used by all states today. For example, Maine and Nebraska award some of their electoral votes by congressional districts. States may change the manner of allocating their electoral votes at any time by changing their state laws. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the states over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.” The current system was not installed by a federal constitutional amendment, and there is no need for an amendment to change the current state laws on allocating electoral votes.

Small states are especially disadvantaged by the current system of electing the President. Twelve of 13 smallest states are almost totally ignored in presidential elections because they are politically non-competitive. Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Alaska regularly vote Republican, and Rhode Island, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont, Maine, and DC regularly vote Democratic. These 12 states together contain 11 million people. Because of the two electoral-vote bonus that each state receives, these 12 non-competitive small states have 40 electoral votes. However, the two-vote bonus is an entirely illusory advantage. Ohio has 11 million people and has "only" 20 electoral votes. As we all know, the 11 million people in Ohio are the center of attention in presidential campaigns, while the 11 million people in the 12 non-competitive small states are utterly irrelevant. Nationwide election of the President would make all of the voters in the 12 smallest states as important as an Ohio voter.

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, 270 of 538). The National Popular Vote bill is described in detail in our 620-page book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote (available for free reading or downloading from our web site).

The National Advisory Board of National Popular Vote includes former congressmen John Anderson (R-Illinois and later independent presidential candidate), John Buchanan (R-Alabama-the first Republican elected to represent Birmingham), 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).

The bill in the Maryland Senate (SB 634) was sponsored by Senators Jamie Raskin (a professor of constitutional law at American University), James Brochin, Thomas M. Middleton, Patrick J. Hogan, and Catherine E. Pugh. The bill in the House of Delegates (HB 148) was sponsored by Delegates Sheila Hixson (chair of Ways and Means Committee), Kumar P. Barve (Majority Leader), Carolyn J. B. Howard, Nancy J. King, Craig Rice, John A. Olszewski, Jr., Frank S. Turner, and Peter F. Murphy.

70% of the public has long supported nationwide election of the president.