The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an agreement among states designed to replace current state rules governing the Electoral College system. If implemented, it would guarantee the election of the national popular vote winner. Eight states and the District of Columbia have passed the compact. Just last week, the country’s most populous state. California joined the compact. With the addition of California, proponents of the NPVIC have nearly half the electoral votes they need for the compact to take effect.
The compact is based on Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, which gives each state legislature the right to decide how to appoint its own electors. Today, 48 states, including Oklahoma, award all of their electoral votes to the candidate with the most popular votes statewide. Proponents of the NPVIC claim that means we are electing the President and elect the President and Vice President of the United States by popular vote and this just simplifies the often misunderstood Electoral College system. You can read more about their proposal at http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/index.php.
Who are the people behind the NPVIC? The Chairman is Dr. John R. Koza, the inventor of the scratch off lottery ticket, and twice a Democrat elector in California. Dr. Kova is a good friend of Al Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the electoral vote count to George W. Bush.
Barry Faden, a Democrat, is the President of NPVIC. He is a San Francisco attorney who supported John Kerry in 2004. He contributed $2,000 to Kerry according to campaignmoney.com.
Board members for NPVIC are Tom Golisano, the owner of Paychex, an HR company for small business and the owner of the NHL’s Buffalo Sabers. In 2008, Golisano, a registered Independent in New York state, gave one million dollars to the Democrats for their national convention. Chris Pearson is State Representative in Vermont. He is a member of the Progressive Party, one of only 6 in the 150 member body. Stephen Siberstein is a California Democrat who contributed $250,000 to the Center for American Progress, a left wing think tank.
So why is NPVIC pushing a national popular vote? In fifty-six Presidential elections, only four times has the winner of the electoral vote not won the popular vote (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000), so why is there such a rush to move to a national popular vote? According to the NPVIC website, it is “to guarantee election of the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.” But that doesn’t seem to be real motive.
When Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 by 500,000 over George W. Bush, liberals began a systemic attack of the Electoral College. Even though Bush won over 70% of the geography of the US and thirty states vs. Gore’s twenty, liberals still believe he stole the election. They know that large urban states tend to be more liberal than rural states, so moving to a popular vote system would give a definite advantage to a liberal.
But the founders of our country were huge proponents of ‘states rights.’ The founders of our republic were avid supporters of state rights. James Madison, known as the father of the constitution, said, “In our complex system of polity, the public will, as a source of authority, may be the will of the people as composing one nation, or the will of the States in their distinct and independent capacities; or the federal will as viewed, for example, through the presidential electors, representing in a certain proportion both the nation and the States.”
According to David Barton of Wallbuilders, the genius of the Electoral College is that it synthesized two important philosophies established in the Constitution: (1) the maintenance of a republican, as opposed to a democratic, form of government and (2) the balancing of power between the smaller and the larger States and between the various diverse regions of the nation. I would recommend you read David's 2001 article, "Electoral College: Preserve or Abolish? " at http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=95
On Saturday, the state committee of the Oklahoma Republican Party voted to oppose any proposal to move to a national popular vote in the election of the POTUS. The vote was unanimous. This is one issue that both Oklahoma Republicans and Democrats must agree on; moving to electing the president by national popular vote would hurt Oklahoma.