"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

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
    Sacramento Bee
    California's voting clout an illusion
    By Dan Walters
    May 7, 2011

    California should be the King Kong of presidential politics but, in fact, its voters play almost no tangible role in deciding who should occupy the White House.

    Its 55 electoral votes are 20% of those needed to elect a president. Since the early 1990s, after nearly a half-century of dominance by Republicans, Democratic presidential candidates have been able to take those electoral votes for granted as part of their built-in base.

    Republican George W. Bush waged an expensive campaign for the state in 2000, but lost to Democrat Al Gore by more than a million votes. Four years later, Bush ignored California in his bid for re-election and lost to Democrat John Kerry by virtually the same margin.

    In 2008, Democrat Barack Obama defeated Republican John McCain in California by an immense landslide of more than 3 million votes. Barring some cataclysmic collapse, California will vote for Obama again next year.

    That means neither Obama nor the Republican candidate, whoever he or she may be, will waste money here.

    But they will continue the recent practice of using California as a political ATM, raising many millions of dollars here ($150 million in 2008) to be spent in states where the outcome may be in doubt.

    Raising presidential campaign money in California and spending it elsewhere is not confined to the November contest. It occurs in the primary season as well, much to the annoyance of California political figures, who yearn to be kingmakers but are largely ignored by presidential hopefuls.

    California has tried to become relevant, for instance, by pushing its presidential primary from June to early in the year, only to see other states jump ahead.

    Candidates don't want to campaign here because of our high costs, preferring to create buzz in smaller states such as Iowa or New Hampshire, where costs are low.

    The latest effort to make California relevant is Assembly Bill 459, which would ratify an interstate compact whereby states agree to award all of their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the highest popular vote nationwide.

    If adopted nationwide, it would, in effect, nullify the Electoral College and the strategies aimed at garnering the magic number of electoral votes, and elect presidents with popular votes. Its effect on California would be to make its popular votes just as important as those of any other state.

    It is not the only way California's presidential votes could become meaningful, however. We also could emulate two other states, Maine and Nebraska, by apportioning electoral votes by congressional district.

    An initiative drive to install that system in California briefly surfaced a few years ago, but Democrats bitterly opposed it -- because it would mean they no longer could take the state for granted.

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