The Plan To Elect The President By Majority

The United States Constitution is outdated, rigid, and quirky. It is the oldest living Constitution, is notoriously difficult to amend, and it established arcane institutions like the Electoral College, which is so convoluted that no other country decided to emulate it.

The Constitution is also unique in that it cedes a substantial amount of legislative power from the federal level to the states, which have long been hailed as “laboratories of democracy” that can experiment with new policies before they are implemented on the national level. Elections in the U.S. are also highly localized, which affords counties and states great leeway to oversee elections for each level of government, whether it is for mayor, state senator, or the President of the United States.

The President is chosen by the Electoral College, an institution that has been subject to wide criticism. For instance, a 2016 study by NPR found that the Electoral College substantially overweighs the votes of citizens in the least populous states, centralizes campaigns in competitive “swing states,” and decreases voter turnout in non-competitive state. Additionally, the system allows for the election of Presidents who do not have the support of the majority of voters in the country.

As a consequence of its many flaws, there have been repeated campaigns to abolish the Electoral College. Yet to do so would require an extraordinary step – a Constitutional amendment. While there are a few pathways to passing an amendment, the “easiest” method is a two-thirds vote by both houses of Congress, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures. In practice, it is extremely difficult to get 75 percent of state legislatures to agree on anything, much less the upending of one of the foundational institutions of presidential politics.

However, state houses are experimenting with a creative way to circumvent the Electoral College without abolishing it outright. The plan is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which is a pledge on behalf of state electors to vote for whichever presidential candidate receives the majority of the national popular vote. So, for instance, if the pledge were in effect and Donald Trump receives 51% of the national popular vote in 2020, California, New York, and all states in the NPVIC would vote for Trump even if the majority of voters in those states did not.[su_pullquote]The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which is a pledge on behalf of state electors to vote for whichever presidential candidate receives the majority of the national popular vote.[/su_pullquote]

Of course, the NPVIC only works if enough states sign on. Since there are 538 total electors in the Electoral College, the NPVIC needs 270 electors, a majority, to become law.  Currently, 13 states have joined the compact, amounting to 181 electoral votes or about two-thirds of the votes needed for the NPVIC to take effect. The pledge only comes into effect once the electoral votes of the signatories crosses the 270-vote threshold.

So far, 19 state legislatures in their 2019 sessions have introduced bills to join the NPVIC, amounting to 171 electoral votes – well in excess the 98 additional electoral votes that the compact needs. Colorado (9 votes) was the latest state to join the compact, as Gov. Jared Polis signed its bill on March 15. Additionally, New Mexico (5 votes) and Delaware (3 votes) passed their bills by wide margins in their lower and upper houses, respectively, and await a vote in their second chambers.

However, other bills to join the NPVIC have already failed in the lower houses of Virginia (13 votes) and Mississippi (6 votes) in February. That leaves 15 states, or an additional 143 electoral votes, still in play. Notably among those states are Florida (29 votes), Ohio (18 votes), Georgia (16 votes), Arizona (11 votes), Indiana (11 votes), and Minnesota (10 votes). If a significant number of these states fail to join the compact, it is unlikely that the NPVIC will take effect any time soon.

Holding back the NPVIC is the fact that abolition of the Electoral College has become tinged by partisan interests. After all, five of the past seven presidential elections saw the Democrat win the popular vote. In two of those five Democratic popular vote wins, the Republican won the election due to the distribution of Electoral College votes. It also true that sparsely populated states, who benefit from outsized representation in the Electoral College, tend to vote for the Republican in presidential elections.[su_pullquote align=”right”]Holding back the NPVIC is the fact that abolition of the Electoral College has become tinged by partisan interests.[/su_pullquote]

These outcomes might explain why red states have been hesitant to join the NPVIC, and why it might be difficult for the compact to pass in those high-population, “critical” states listed above, which range from solidly red (Indiana) to lean-red (Florida, Ohio, and Georgia) to purple (Arizona and Minnesota).

[su_pullquote align=”right”]Perhaps instead of defending anti-democratic institutions, partisans ought to consider adopting platforms that appeal to a majority of voters across the country.[/su_pullquote]However, it is also true that George W. Bush won his reelection in 2004 while also winning the popular vote, and most Republican presidents before him such as Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon also won the popular vote. Abolishing or circumventing the Electoral College does not mean that the Republican Party would never win another election. Perhaps instead of defending anti-democratic institutions, partisans ought to consider adopting platforms that appeal to a majority of voters across the country.

Garrett Cunningham ‘19 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at cunningham.garrett@wustl.edu.