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.


...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.



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.
  
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.