"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors ..." -- U.S. Constitution
Ask your legislators to pass National Popular Vote

ZIP:
Endorsed by 2,110
State Legislators
In addition to 1,129 state legislative sponsors (shown above), 981 other legislators have cast recorded votes in favor of the National Popular Vote bill.
Progress by State

Tom Golisano

Entrepreneur Tom Golisano Endorses National Popular Vote

Short Explanation
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee a majority of the Electoral College to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill would reform the Electoral College so that the electoral vote in the Electoral College reflects the choice of the nation's voters for President of the United States.   more
11 Enactments
The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted into law in states possessing 165 electoral votes — 61% of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the legislation.

  • Maryland - 10 votes
  • Massachusetts - 11
  • Washington - 12 votes
  • Vermont - 3 votes
  • Rhode Island - 4 votes
  • DC - 3 votes
  • Hawaii - 4 votes
  • New Jersey - 14 votes
  • Illinois - 20 votes
  • New York - 29 votes
  • California - 55 votes

  • Videos

    Fox Interview

    CBS Video

    Popular Vote

    Class Election

    more videos

    Advisory Board
    John Anderson (R-I–IL)
    Birch Bayh (D–IN)
    John Buchanan (R–AL)
    Tom Campbell (R–CA)
    Tom Downey (D–NY)
    D. Durenberger (R–MN)
    Jake Garn (R–UT)
    What Do You Think
    How should we elect the President?
    The candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states.
    The current Electoral College system.

    Add this poll to your web site

    26. Myth That Our Nation’s Freedom, Security, and Prosperity Are Protected by the Winner-Take-All Rule

    26.1  MYTH: Our nation’s freedom, security, and prosperity are protected by the current winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes.

    QUICK ANSWER:

  • The state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes has no connection with our nation’s freedom, security, or prosperity.
  • MORE DETAILED ANSWER:

    Tara Ross, an opponent of the National Popular Vote plan, argues:

    “This important aspect of our Constitution [the Electoral College] continues to protect our freedom, just as it did when it was created in 1787.” [543] [Emphasis added]

    A brochure published by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation of Olympia, Washington states:

    “[The Electoral College is] essential to our security and prosperity and, in the end, to keeping America free.[544] [Emphasis added]

    Neither Ross nor the Evergreen Freedom Foundation offers any argument that establishes a cause-and-effect relationship between our nation’s prosperity and state winner-take-all statutes (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most votes in the state).

    Similarly, there is no argument as to how the nation’s security is enhanced by the winner-take-all rule.

    Is there any evidence that our nation’s freedom was endangered by the fact that only three states used the winner-take-all rule in our nation’s first presidential election in 1789?

    Was prosperity reduced when Nebraska in 1992, and Maine in 1969, adopted the congressional district system of awarding electoral votes? It should be noted that all the states used the winner-take-all rule during the Great Depression.


    543 Written testimony submitted by Tara Ross to the Delaware Senate in June 2010.

    Reform the Electoral College so that the electoral vote reflects the nationwide popular vote for President