President should be the candidate with the most votes. ‌ ‌ ‌ If you were looking for the perfect distillation of how dysfunctional the American system of electing the president is, it would be hard to top last week’s federal appeals court ruling allowing “electors” — the members of the Electoral College — to vote for whomever they want, rather than the candidate they were pledged to support. [click for a discussion on faithless electors] ...The point is that faithless electors are not the real problem. What really disregards the will of the people is the winner-take-all rule currently used by every state but Maine and Nebraska. Giving all electors to the winner of the statewide popular vote erases the votes of citizens in the political minority — say, the 4.5 million people who voted for Donald Trump in California, or the 3.9 million who voted for Hillary Clinton in Texas. Nationwide, this was the fate of 55 million people in 2016, or 42 percent of the country’s electorate. The winner-take-all rule encourages campaigns to focus on closely divided battleground states, where a swing of even a few hundred votes can move a huge bloc of electors — creating presidents out of popular-vote losers, like George W. Bush and Donald Trump. This violates the central democratic (or, if you prefer, republican) premises of political equality and majority rule. What most people don’t realize is that the winner-take-all rule exists nowhere in the Constitution. It’s a pure creation of the states. They can award their electors by congressional district, as Maine and Nebraska do, or in proportion to the state’s popular vote, as several states have considered. Or they could award them to the candidate who wins the most votes nationwide, regardless of the state outcome. That’s the elegant approach of the National Popular Vote interstate compact, which achieves a popular vote not by abolishing the College but by using it as the framers designed it — as a state-based institution. So far 15 states and the District of Columbia, with 196 electoral votes among them, have joined the compact, promising to award their electors to the national vote-winner. The compact goes into effect once it is joined by states representing 270 electoral votes — the bare majority needed to become president — thus guaranteeing the White House to the candidate who won the most votes. Critics say that relying on the popular vote would allow the presidency to be decided by the big cities on the coasts, but big cities don’t come close to having enough votes to swing a national election. At the same time, the Electoral College doesn’t do any of the things its defenders claim it does. For example, it doesn’t force candidates to win nationwide support, and it doesn’t protect smaller states, since winner-take-all rules give far more influence to larger states, especially battlegrounds. It’s unlikely that battleground states will abandon winner-take-all on their own, since it would lessen their political power. But right now a constitutional amendment to eliminate it would be as unlikely as one eliminating the Electoral College itself. Despite more than 700 proposals for amendments to reform or abolish the Electoral College — by far the most of any provision of the Constitution — it has remained. The College has survived not because it makes sense, but because one party or the other has believed it gives them an advantage. That may be smart politics, but it’s terrible for a democracy. Read the full editorial - [link removed]   BACKGROUND INFORMATION 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. It would make every vote equal throughout the United States. It would guarantee that every voter in every state matters in every presidential election. The shortcomings of the current system of electing the President stem from "winner-take-all" laws that have been enacted at the state level. These laws award 100% of a state's electoral votes to the candidate receiving the most popular votes in each state. Because of these state winner-take-all laws, five of our 45 Presidents (including two of the last three) have come into office without having won the most popular votes nationwide. Another problem occurs in every presidential election, namely that presidential candidates have no reason to campaign in, or pay attention to, voters in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. In 2012, 100% of the general-election campaign events (and virtually all campaign expenditures) were concentrated in the 12 closely divided "battleground" states where Romney's support was 45%-51%. Thirty-eight states were totally ignored, including almost all small states, medium-sized states, rural states, western states, southern states, and northeastern states. Two-thirds of the events (176 of 253) were concentrated in just 4 states (OH, FL, VA, IA). Similarly, in 2016, almost all (94%) general-election campaign events were in the 12 battleground states where Trump's support was in the narrow range of 43%-51%. Two-thirds of the campaign events (273 of 399) were in just 6 states (OH, FL, VA, NC, PA, MI). It does not take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to change existing state winner-take-all laws. State winner-take-all laws were enacted by state legislatures under their authority under Article II of the U.S. Constitution: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...." These state laws may be changed in the same way as they were originally enacted -- namely by action of the state legislature. The winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes was not the Founding Fathers' choice. It was used by only three states in the nation's first presidential election in 1789 (and repealed by all three by 1800). Winner-take-all was never debated at the Constitutional Convention or mentioned in the Federalist Papers. The National Popular Vote interstate compact will go into effect when enacted by states with a majority of the presidential electors—that is, 270 of 538. After the compact comes into effect, each individual voter in all 50 states and DC will acquire a direct vote in the choice of all of the presidential electors from all of the states that enacted the compact. The presidential candidate supported by the most voters in all 50 states and DC will thereby win a majority of the presidential electors in the Electoral College (at least 270), and therefore become President. The National Popular Vote bill is an achievable political goal. A record 4 states enacted the National Popular Vote bill in 2019. The bill is now law in 16 states. These states have 196 electoral votes. This is only 74 short of the 270 needed to activate the bill. The bill has been enacted into law by 5 small jurisdictions (Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the District of Columbia), 8 medium-sized states (Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington state), and 3 big states (California, Illinois, and New York). It has also passed one house in 8 additional states with 75 electoral votes (AR, AZ, ME, MI, MN, NC, NV, OK). A total of 3,408 state legislators among all 50 states have endorsed it. Learn more at the National Popular Vote web site which has 14 explanatory videos and answers to 131 myths about the National Popular Vote bill NPR debate between Dr. John Koza, Chair of National Popular Vote, and Tara Ross, a leading opponent of the National Popular Vote bill Watch C-SPAN interview with Dr. John Koza Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Colorado National Popular Vote web site Colorado National Popular Vote Facebook page For additional information, see our book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote (downloadable for free). Chapter 9 provides short and long answers to 131 myths about the National Popular Vote bill. Let other people know your opinion. Write a letter-to-the-editor or op-ed for a newspaper. How to submit a letter to newspapers in any state. Also, please take a moment and use our convenient email system to send emails to your state legislators to support the National Popular Vote bill in your state. Your donation to National Popular Vote enables our traveling and local representatives to meet with state legislators around the country on a year-round basis. We meet with virtually every state legislator and the numerous people and organizations that influence them. We also do extensive public relations and educational efforts. The National Popular Vote organization is a non-profit corporation. We can't do these things without supporters like you. National Popular Vote | Box 1441, Los Altos, CA 94023 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | About Constant Contact Sent by [email protected] in collaboration with Try email marketing for free today!