48
Virginia joins a national effort to ensure only popular vote winners become president (www.npr.org)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/politics@sh.itjust.works
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

With Virginia, the total number of states signed on to the interstate compact is now 18, plus the District of Columbia, for a total of 222 electoral votes.

The compact doesn't go into effect, though, until there are enough states signed up to reach the required 270 electoral votes to elect a president.

"This [effort] started 20 years ago and it's been slow and steady … constant forward momentum across these 20 years," said Alyssa Cass, a strategist for the National Popular Vote Project and a Democratic consultant. "Bills have been introduced in almost every state, most passed in a bipartisan way. This is on the 5-yard line of making this a reality."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 6 months ago* (7 children)

Not quite for a five year old but: These states have agreed with each other to allocate their votes in the electoral college to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. The agreement only goes into affect once states controlling 270 electoral college votes have signed on. This is the amount required to win the presidency, so at that point the popular vote winner will necessarily win the election.

It's likely that this agreement would face challenges in court if/when it eventually goes into effect.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (6 children)

    Right, but isn't that how things work now? As soon as an elect has 270 electoral votes they win. It's alwats been first past the goal. It must force the electoral college to vote as the popular deems. I'm fairly certain at the moment the 538 individual people that actually get to vote on who becomes president can vote however they choose. No matter how you or i voted.

    Think i answered my own question.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    If this was in effect Hillary Clinton would have won in 2016, Al Gore in 2000.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_in_which_the_winner_lost_the_popular_vote

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    The dems really couldnt. Getting rid of the electoral college would likely require ratification. Over two thirds of the votes are needed in both the house and senate. Not likely. It would take 2/3 of the states to ratify it ... that would happen first imo.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Right, the key is that now the electoral college does not necessarily have the same result as the popular vote.

    This agreement, if in effect, will ensure that the EC result matches the popular vote.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago*

    Different states have different laws, but many have faithless elector protections.

    A faithless elector is someone who, after being chosen for the electoral college, does not vote for the candidate that everyone expected. Since states have a wide latitude to select or reject electoral college representatives, they can pas laws saying "If you change your vote, we will cancel your vote and replace you". I would expect that this popular vote compact requires such protection.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent