By Jordan Meadows
Staff Writers
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is gaining renewed attention as Democrats look to use recent state-government gains to advance an agreement that could fundamentally change how the United States elects its president.
Introduced in 2006, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an agreement among participating states to award all their presidential electoral votes to whichever candidate receives the most votes nationwide, regardless of which candidate wins their individual state. The agreement would only become active once participating states collectively control at least 270 electoral votes, guaranteeing that the national popular vote winner receives an Electoral College majority.
The compact would not technically abolish the Electoral College. Instead, it would change how participating states determine which candidate receives their electoral votes. The constitutional process of appointing electors and formally casting electoral votes would remain in place, but the results of the national election would determine how those votes are allocated in participating states.
The movement gained significant attention following the 2000 presidential election, when Democrat Al Gore won the national popular vote but lost the presidency to Republican George W. Bush through the Electoral College. The issue returned to national prominence in 2016, when Donald Trump won the presidency despite receiving nearly three million fewer popular votes than Hillary Clinton.
Supporters also argue that, because candidates can secure significant electoral advantages by winning a handful of competitive states, campaigns frequently concentrate advertising, visits and resources in battleground states while giving less attention to states considered safely Democratic or Republican. A FairVote study of the 2004 election found that approximately three-quarters of the candidates' peak-season campaign resources went to just five states, while 18 states received no candidate visits or television advertising.
One of the compact's most significant features is that supporters believe it can be implemented without a constitutional amendment. They rely on Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, which gives state legislatures authority to determine how their presidential electors are appointed.
However, that interpretation is disputed.
One of the largest legal questions involves the Constitution's Compact Clause, which generally prohibits states from entering into agreements with other states without congressional consent. Critics argue that the National Popular Vote agreement is precisely the type of interstate arrangement that requires congressional approval, particularly because it coordinates how participating states exercise their electoral authority and could affect states that have not joined.
Supporters counter that not every interstate agreement requires congressional approval and argue that the compact does not give states any new constitutional powers. Instead, they maintain that each state is independently exercising its existing authority over the appointment of electors.
Whether that argument would survive a constitutional challenge remains unresolved.
Opponents also question the fairness and practical consequences of allowing participating states to award their electoral votes based on election results in other states. Critics further contend that the Electoral College reflects the country's federal structure and provides smaller states with an important role in presidential elections.
North Carolina has also been part of the effort to expand the agreement. Democratic lawmakers have repeatedly introduced legislation to join the compact, including Senate Bill 104 and House Bill 191, but it has been blocked or prevented from advancing under Republican legislative leadership.
North Carolina's 16 electoral votes would make it a meaningful addition to the agreement. However, any new legislation would need approval from both chambers of the General Assembly and the governor. If Republicans maintain control of the state Senate, Democrats could need bipartisan support to move the proposal forward.
The agreement also contains provisions addressing withdrawals and changes in Electoral College representation. Participating states must maintain the required 270 electoral votes for the compact to remain effective. If enough states join and the agreement survives legal challenges, the 2028 presidential election could become the first in which participating states award their electoral votes based on the national popular vote.
Presidential campaigns would likely have to reconsider their traditional strategies, potentially directing more attention toward voters in states that have historically received limited campaign visits and advertising.
As of today, 18 states and Washington, D.C. have approved the agreement, representing 222 electoral votes, approximately 82 percent of the 270 needed for activation. Recent Democratic gains in Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arizona could create an opportunity to secure another 61 electoral votes. If all five states joined, the compact would be over 280 electoral votes, enough to take effect and enough to spare.
