The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential ticket wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, regardless of which ticket won more votes in their individual state/district. Introduced in 2006, the compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.
While I’m all for the idea of a popular vote, it’s debatable whether this would be constitutional and would almost certainly go up to the Supreme Court if it were enacted. It would be an interesting case for sure.
I’m sure you’re right, but the text of the constitution is very clear
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress; but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
It doesn’t mean the Supreme Court as constituted would uphold it, but it’s pretty clearly constitutional.
It’s also very clear when it says that states can’t enter into any compact without Congressional approval. Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3 is known as the Compact Clause and states:
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
In Virginia v. Tennessee (1893) the Supreme Court specified that Congressional approval would be needed if the agreement is “directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States.”
And that would probably apply here because it’s undermining the way the Electoral College was intended to work.
But you are also correct that states are free to appoint their electors as they see fit, so it’s quite the conundrum.
My assumption as a layman is that any official document or compact would be thrown out so there wouldn’t be anything on the books about a popular vote compact. States would probably still be free to individually appoint their electors to the winner of the popular vote, but then there also wouldn’t be anything holding them to that standard either.
But you are also correct that states are free to appoint their electors as they see fit, so it’s quite the conundrum.
The solution here is that the states can do it, but they all need to do it ‘independently’, without any formal agreement or compact.
Even if the agreement where to be let stand, without federal buy-in who enforces compliance? You would essentially need a sort of sub-nation to ensure some signatory who doesn’t like the results doesn’t decide to refuse their duty later.
There’s an argument (summarized in the wiki article) that Article 1 Section 10 prevents states from making compacts like this
You’ve put in the wrong acronym, it’s NaPoVoInterCo
