Farewell to the electoral college? Democrats now control enough states to raise the popular vote

WASHINGTON (AP) — The midterm elections have already shaken up national politics. Because of the number of state governments that have come under Democratic control, they could also change the way the United States elects its president.

The sudden blue hue of so many other states opens the door to enough states joining 18 other Democratic-led states in a deal that would effectively neutralize the Electoral College. That would turn the battle for the presidency into a battle for the most votes nationwide, rather than concentrating candidates in a half-dozen swing states.

LEARN MORE: Electoral College critics push for popular vote deal

States that joined what is known as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact total 222 electoral college votes. Once the number of affected states reaches the 270 needed to win the presidency, the arrangement would effectively require a candidate to win the national popular vote to achieve a majority in the Electoral College.

It’s unclear whether the strategy has the support of all newly elected lawmakers and governors in key states, and it’s almost certain it will draw legal challenges from conservative groups. If the bill succeeds, it could end up before the Supreme Court, with a conservative majority.

Still, Democratic victories for governor and in state legislatures make the plan’s supporters optimistic. In Tuesday’s election, Democrats won full control in six states, accounting for 71 electoral college votes: Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Minnesota, with its 10 electoral votes, had joined the pact while previously under full Democratic control in 2023.

Some governors express support while others are noncommittal

“We can get rid of it,” Wisconsin’s new Democratic governor, David Crowley, said of the Electoral College, now that he has a legislature in his party’s hands for the first time in 16 years. “I’m interested in having those conversations with the state legislature.”

Over the weekend, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a likely contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, said he would like his new Democratic legislature to take steps to make the Electoral College obsolete.

“I think the national popular vote makes sense. My view on that hasn’t changed,” Shapiro said on a liberal podcast. “I will work with lawmakers to determine what the right mechanism is to move forward on this.”

If Pennsylvania and Wisconsin supported the pact, to reach the threshold of 270, Michigan and Arizona or Nevada would have to join. On Tuesday, the office of Michigan’s new Democratic governor, Jocelyn Benson, said it would not comment on the matter.

Not all Democratic governors have yet adopted this trend. In a television interview Monday, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs declined to say whether she favored her state joining the pact. She said she was focused on other issues, like the cost of living.

Nevada’s previous experience on this issue also serves as a warning to advocates.

WATCH: Can the electoral college system be changed?

In 2019, then-Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak vetoed a measure that would have committed Nevada to rejoining the compact after it was passed by Democratic majorities in both houses of the Legislature. Sisolak said at the time that the popular vote idea would diminish the influence of less populous states like Nevada in national elections.

Democrats passed another measure to join the pact in 2023, but failed to bypass the state’s Republican governor at the time. Tai Sims, a spokesperson for Nevada’s new Democratic Gov. Aaron Ford, said in a statement Tuesday: “There will be a time to talk about the presidential election, but for now, Ford is focused on reducing costs for working families.”

Republicans will use their diminished power to fight back.

“Our Constitution gives states the right to have a say in choosing the president for a reason,” Tyler August, the Republican leader in the Wisconsin Assembly, said in a statement Tuesday. “It would undermine that balance and disenfranchise Wisconsin voters by letting results in other states trump their choice.”

Two presidents 16 years apart lost the popular vote

The idea of ​​moving to a national popular vote gained traction among Democrats after Republican George W. Bush won the 2000 presidential election by edging out Democrat Al Gore in the Electoral College, even while losing the popular vote. This situation accelerated after the Republicans won the White House this way again in 2016, with Donald Trump’s victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Support free and independent journalism. Join the PBS News Press Pass

Under the National Popular Vote plan, the candidate who wins the nationwide popular vote will receive the Electoral College votes of states that have joined the compact.

There’s nothing inherently partisan about the idea, said Patrick Rosenstiel, a Minnesota Republican strategist and senior consultant to the popular vote movement. At times, Republican-majority legislative chambers, including the Oklahoma Senate, have passed proposals to join the compact, but the bills have gone no further.

He said his own presidential vote was essentially meaningless because Minnesota had voted reliably Democratic in presidential elections for decades, giving him no say in the outcome and distracting from the vast majority of candidates.

“I don’t think I’ve ever played a significant role in the outcome of a presidential election,” he said. “The national popular vote forces campaigns to focus on every compelling voter in every constituency across the country.”

Rosenstiel said the national popular vote campaign has been ramping up to advance the issue when new Democratic state legislatures convene early in the year. He said the organization has already found legislative sponsors.

Pact could raise constitutional concerns

Republicans no longer have the power to stop change in Democratic-controlled states, but some conservative groups are ready for the fight. The change “disenfranchises state voters if enacted, violates the United States Constitution, and undermines the intent of America’s founders,” analysts at the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank, wrote in September.

There is also no guarantee that the proposals will be adopted. Derek Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame, skeptical of the idea, said some might have doubts now that the symbolic protest vote has become a real possibility. He said there would also be constitutional issues that would likely lead to legal challenges.

The Constitution allows states to hold elections, and the Supreme Court, in a case involving electors seeking to find a replacement for Trump in 2016, ruled that states can require electors to vote for the presidential candidate to whom they pledged.

Muller flagged potential legal obstacles to the popular vote plan. States have the power to conduct their elections, but they cannot set rules that will determine the outcome of elections in other states. Additionally, each state runoff is different, and some could potentially have third-party candidates who would not appear elsewhere, leading to the dilution of the vote for a Democrat or Republican in one state over another.

This could violate the 14th Amendment’s requirement that everyone be afforded “equal protection of the laws.” The U.S. Supreme Court also could rule that states cannot enter into a compact to change one of their core constitutional obligations unless they obtain congressional approval.

“I think the Supreme Court will be interested,” Muller said.

Bauer reported from Madison, Wisconsin. Associated Press writers Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pa., Jacqueline GaNun in Lansing, Mich., Jessica Hill in Las Vegas and Mikella Schuettler in Phoenix contributed to this report.