National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
- NPVIC has the force of law
- NPVIC in the legislative process, not yet legally
- Legislative initiative (initially) failed
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ( abbreviation NPVIC ) denotes an agreement between different U.S. states in terms of the mode of the presidential election. Translated from the English means it as much as interim federal pact for the nationwide vote counting '.
The presidential election in the United States has so far been indirect, that is, the President is not elected directly by the voters, but the selectors an electoral college ( Electoral College ), which then elects the president. Each state chooses according to its population electors in the electoral college. This is true in the vast majority of states, the principle of majority rule, that is, the respective winner gets all the electoral votes ( the winner takes it all, the winner takes it all ). This election system has drawn much criticism. With the NPVIC Initiative various states try ultimately on the way intergovernmental agreements to implement a nationwide direct presidential election, without having to change the Constitution of the United States.
- 4.1 List of states that are party to the Covenant
- 4.2 Current Active Bills
- 4.3 state of legislative initiative in the individual states
Select mode of the presidential election in the United States
Each U.S. state and in addition also the District of Columbia sent in accordance with its population of electors in the electoral college. According to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, the states have the right to decide how they determine their electors, who are posted in the electoral college. Different models of selection Historically in the history of the United States practiced by various states. Today, 48 of the 50 states send their electors by majority vote, that is the candidate with the most votes wins all the votes in the state. Only the states of Maine and Nebraska send representatives to the electoral college according to the respective majorities in the electoral districts ( congressional districts).
Arguments against the current electoral system
Key role of the swing states
Most states belong in presidential elections a majority in one of the two major political camps. The southern states usually choose republican majority, while the Democrats usually have the majority in the countries of the Pacific Coast and New England. In the electoral college, therefore, both political camps are often similar strongly represented. There are in every presidential election states, where the majority situation " on the brink " are. This so-called swing states comes in the election, especially if it is heavily populated states often is an optional critical importance. The campaign therefore takes place almost exclusively in these swing states. Critically it is argued that de facto so relatively few voters ( just the the swing states ) to decide the political future of the country.
Majority in the electoral college is not always the nationwide popular vote
A special feature of the franchise is that candidates can get the majority in the electoral college, which in the nationwide vote counting ( popular vote) do not have the majority. This case came on three occasions in the history of the United States and indeed in the presidential election of 1876, 1888 and 2000. During the last election were George W. Bush / Dick Cheney against Al Gore / Joe Lieberman on. The majority in the electoral college was 271:266 votes for Bush / Cheney; at the statewide vote counting but were Gore / Lieberman with 50,999,897 ( 48.4 %) to 50,456,002 ( 47.9 %) votes in the lead, so they could over half a million votes to win more than Bush / Cheney for themselves. The election was ultimately decided by results in the swing state Florida, the duo Bush / Cheney after two vote-count with 2,912,790 ( 48.85 %) to 2,912,253 ( 48.84 %), ie 537 votes majority won.
Discussion about the introduction of a nationwide direct presidential election
In multiple opinion polls in recent decades, the majority of surveyed U.S. citizens have called for the direct election of the president instead of the previous election by an electoral college. Proponents hope to gain from the direct election of a higher turnout. At present, the turnout of little importance except in the highly competitive swing states. The number of electors of a state depends only on the population and not on the number of voters. In a state like Texas, who has always voted republican in the last election with a solid majority, there is a trailer for the Democrats little motivation to vote because his vote will have no influence on the overall result with high probability. The same is true in reverse for Republicans in the Democratic -dominated states of New York and California. Critics of the previous electoral law argue that the turnout would be much higher if the President directly across the country, ie would not be selected via the way of the Electoral College, since then, for example, a voter in Texas democratic vote would count as much as a voter in California.
History of NPVIC Initiative
The idea of abolishing the Electoral College by a Amendment to the Constitution ( amendment) and to replace the direct election of the president, there are already long. For a change the U.S. Constitution, however, very large majorities are required. The proposed law to a constitutional amendment can only be introduced if it is supported by a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress. Thus, the constitutional amendment Act comes into force must 3/4 of all states, that is, at the time 38 of 50 agree.
In 2001, the professor of law at Northwestern University suggested Robert Bennett in a scientific publication, a procedure which results in virtually constitutive of a nationwide direct presidential election without a constitutional amendment. Was necessary for only a legal coordination of the voting behavior of states in the Electoral College. Such legitimate coordination is constitutional, according to legal experts. Basically, this is the by the Constitution the states guaranteed right to determine their electors according to their own laws. However, some legal experts see a potential breach of the Compact Clause of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, which restricts the right of states to conclude pacts.
The legislative initiative of NPVIC
The pact between the states provides that this first select according to the same mode as before their electors to so many states have joined the pact that they determine the majority in the electoral college (which are currently 270 of the total 538). After that, all the electors gathered in the Covenant states should be determined so that they vote for the candidate who has received the majority of the statewide vote counting. This is intended to ensure that the candidate with the nation's highest number of votes wins the election. States that join the pact to undertake to adopt such a law. The law has, among others, the following contents:
Article II-1
'Each Member State shall carry out on its territory a choice for President and Vice President of the United States. "
Article III-1
"Prior to the time set by law for the meeting and voting by the presidential Electors, the chief election official of each member state Shall deterministic mine the number of votes for each presidential slate in each State of the United States and in the District of Columbia in Which votes havebeen cast in a statewide popular election and seeking votes Shall add together to produce a "national popular vote total " for each presidential slate. "
"Before the statutory deadline for the meeting of electors and their poll for the presidential election the main election commissioner shall [ usually the Secretary of State of any State ], the votes for each presidential candidate in the states of the United States and the District of Columbia votes calculate and define for all the candidates a " country-wide total number of votes ". "
Article IV-1
"This agreement Shall take effect When states cumulatively posse sing a Majority of the electoral votes have enacted this agreement in Substantially the same form and the enactments by seeking states have taken effect in each state. "
"This agreement will enter into force when the states that have implemented this agreement in its essential parts into a binding and legally binding form of law, have obtained in the electoral college, the majority of the votes. "
The Pact members commit themselves to their electors selected so that this vote for the candidate with the nation's highest number of votes. If the (extremely unlikely) event occurs that two candidates achieve the exact same number of votes, the existing electoral system to be used. In the event of the dissolution of the Electorate College of pact also loses its validity.
List of states that are party to the Covenant
Currently active bills
The following table shows the states where the NPVIC - bill currently (as of April 2014) is in the discussion.
State of legislative initiative in the individual states
In the table below, the legislative initiative is listed as " open" if it has not yet been put to the vote. Only those bills are listed that have been treated in at least one chamber or are still pending. "No" is this table does not necessarily mean that the bill was rejected, it can also mean that they are not on time came to vote.
EV = electoral votes ( electoral votes)