Several Democratic-led states have been working for years on a plan that would shift presidential elections toward the national popular vote without formally abolishing the Electoral College. Supporters may have a realistic chance of putting it into effect by 2028.
The proposal is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Under the agreement, participating states would award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most votes nationwide. It would take effect once states representing at least 270 electoral votes have joined.
So far, 18 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the compact. Together, they account for 222 electoral votes, leaving 48 more needed before the agreement could take effect. The deadline for states seeking to participate in the 2028 election is July 20 of that year.
The compact would not remove the Electoral College from the Constitution, its supporters argue. Instead, it would make the outcome of the national popular vote decisive once the participating states held enough electoral votes.
The idea has been discussed for years, but it was often seen as unlikely because the coalition remained well short of the 270-vote threshold. Recent political shifts, however, have renewed attention to a possible route forward. Critics say the proposal would favor Democrats, though its supporters and opponents disagree about how it could affect individual states.
One proposed path involves Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin. Together, those states have 61 electoral votes. Pennsylvania and Michigan, along with at least two of the other three, would need to join for the compact to reach the threshold.
Until recently, none of the five states had a Democratic trifecta, with the same party controlling the governorship and both legislative chambers. After the midterm elections, Democrats gained control of all three branches in each of them, including Nevada, the only state on the list with a Republican governor before the elections.
That shift does not guarantee the compact will pass in any of the states. Trent England, a spokesman for Save Our States, said voters should be concerned about what he called an effort to “hijack the Electoral College.” He also argued that the compact has procedural weaknesses, including no process for a nationwide recount, no guidance on combining results from states that use ranked-choice voting, and a reliance on cooperation from states that have not joined.
Some Democrats may also oppose the change, England said, because it could reduce the importance of states such as Pennsylvania in presidential campaigns.
Other concerns include whether Congress would need to approve an agreement among states and whether the compact could infringe on voters’ rights. Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky has argued that without a constitutional amendment, legal and practical obstacles would be difficult to overcome. He also warned that a national popular vote could produce unexpected effects, potentially canceling out some votes.
If the compact reaches 270 electoral votes, legal challenges are likely, and the dispute could ultimately go to the Supreme Court for a ruling on its constitutionality.
