b'Some Want Big Electoral Changes. Part 1By: Frank Friday,Government AffairsPresidential elections decided by the ElectoralConstitution: the power under Article 2 Section 1 College, in opposition to the raw popular vote,to choose how to allocate its presidential electors, were largely a theoretical issue in the 20th Centuryand the power under Article 1 Section 10 to enter but it has happened twice now in this century lead- interstate compacts. ing to at least some interest in making changes. As an interstate compact, this is a binding con-Small states argue the College protects theirtract entered by state law. Once the states that role in choosing the President and makes possi- enact these laws exceed the threshold of most ble fraud in one state much less problematic, aselectoral votes (270 out of 538), the compact is it only affects that states electoral votes. Anyway,supposed to take effect. Even where states choose it would be very unlikely a Constitutional amend- not to participate in the NPVC, the votes from ment could pass both the Senate and the States tothose states will be incorporated on an equal basis change the current system. into the total national popular vote, which in turn Several large states, however, have joined intodetermines which candidate earns the electoral the National Popular Vote Compact, NPVC, whichvotes in NPVC states.guarantees election of the presidential candidateCurrently eight states and the District of Colum-who earns the greatest number of votes in all 50bia have enacted laws to join the compact, about states and the District of Columbia. The NPVChalf the number needed to make this possible. does not dispense with the Electoral College andHowever, even if enough states do agree to do is not a constitutional amendment. Rather, it isthis, there are significant legal hurdles remaining. based on powers given to the states under theWe will look at those in Part 2 next issue.ELECTION BOXELECTORAL COLLEGE3'