In the 21st century, America needs a president who is the choice of a #CitizenMajority. Every time.

This nation was created

with soaring rhetoric which is only in this new century becoming more fulfilled than it was when These United States were still a fledgling Republic. 

in order to form a more perfect union  establish justice insure domestic tranquility provide for the common defense promote the general welfare secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

Those seem like such common sense ideals, when you think about it. 

A country which works for all of the people.  A legal system which is fair to all.  ‘Do unto others’ is a fine rule for any society. #StrongerTogether is an enduring American idea. Healthy and happy people are industrious and hardworking people.  Keep the present safe and prepare for the future. 

But there were plenty of things which John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and the rest of them did, both in the world and on the printed page, which have left us with some problems down the long years of history. 

Like the 2nd Amendment and the Electoral College. 

The first one is an issue which, should the youth vote turn out as well in 2020 as it did in the 2018 Midterms, it may well be taken up by a Democratic Majority Congress in spring of 2021. 

The second one has been long agonized over in the waning years of the 20th century and even more so in the nascent 21st century; but there is a cure for what ails us. Let me tell you about it. 

These United States vs The United States

What is so troublesome about the electoral college is that Bush in his first term and Trump won their elections while losing the national popular vote of the people. Two and a half centuries ago and clear up to the mid-20th century a lot of the people in the United States thought of themselves as Virginians (or Californians or Iowans, etc) first and as Americans second. Our Republic is the braiding-together of 50 sovereign nation-states into a single Republic called The United States of America; and up until the time of my grandparents when Americans talked about their country they usually said, “These United States.” 

Today you seldom (if ever) hear that phrase — These United States. I believe that is because the people of this country think about themselves differently than their forebearers ever did. Today people simple call themselves “American” and think of their nation as America or perhaps the US or USA. They do not think of their state as more than the part of government that issues driver’s licenses and marriage licenses, and taxes your real estate each year. 

Americans in the 21st century no longer see allegiance to their state, but to their nation. When they hear or read the phrase “united we stand”, they don’t think of the states they inhabit, but their fellow American citizens. 

In light of this change in the zeitgeist of the Republic it is time to address a political aspect of this change, and that is the Electoral College.

How it started

The nation was constructed so that all states; no matter their geographic shape or size, or the number of people who live there; were afforded the same voice in the Senate (2 US Senators per state). This was the end result of some very contentious debates, excerpted from the official US Senate website: 

During the summer of 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia established equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives.  Called the “Great Compromise” or the “Connecticut Compromise,” the unique plan for congressional representation resolved the most controversial aspect of the drafting of the Constitution.  

In the weeks before the Constitution’s framers agreed to the compromise, the delegates from the states with large populations argued that each state’s representation in the Senate should correspond to the size of the state.  Large-state delegates promoted James Madison’s Virginia Plan, the document that was the basis for several of the clauses in the Constitution.  Under this plan, the Senate and the House would base their membership on the same proportional “right of suffrage.”   That is, the number of senators in each state would be determined by its population of free citizens and slaves.  Large states, then, stood to gain the most seats in the Senate.  As justification for this advantage, delegates noted that their states contributed more of the nation’s  financial and defensive resources than small states, and therefore, required a greater say in government.

Note that the argument about “equal” vs “proportional” representation in the US Senate is still the same, all of these years later; only now the difference between the smallest population state, Wyoming, and the most populous state, California, is about 1:75.

Small-state delegates hoped to protect states’ rights within a confederate system of government. Fearing the effects of majority rule, they demanded equal representation in Congress, as was practiced under the Articles of Confederation  and assumed in William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan.  In fact, some framers threatened to withdraw from the convention if a proportional representation measure passed.  

Other delegates sought a compromise between large-state and small-state interests. As early as 1776, Connecticut’s Roger Sherman had suggested that Congress represent the people as well as the states.  During the 1787 convention, Sherman proposed that House representation be based on the population, while in the Senate, the states would be equally represented.  Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have an equal vote in the Senate except in matters concerning money.  The convention’s grand committee reported his motion, with some modifications, to the delegates early in July.  Madison led the debates against Franklin’s measure, believing it an injustice to the majority of Americans, while some small-state delegates were reluctant even to support proportional representation in the House.  On July 16, delegates narrowly adopted the mixed representation plan giving states equal votes in the Senate within a federal system of government.

Once delegates established equal representation in the Senate, they needed to determine how many senators would represent each state.  State constitutions offered some guidance.  Several states designated one senator per county or district, while in Delaware there were three senators for each of the three counties.  Convention delegates did not refer to the state precedents in debate, however.  Instead, they seemed to take a common-sense approach in deciding the number of senators.

According to constitutional commentator Joseph Story (1779-1845), few, if any, delegates considered one senator per state sufficient representation.   Lone senators might leave their state unrepresented in times of illness or absence, and would have no colleague to consult with on state issues.  Additional senators, moreover, would increase the size of the Senate, making it a more knowledgeable body, and better able to counter the influence of the House.   On the other hand, a very large Senate would soon lose its distinctive membership and purpose, and actually decrease its ability to check the lower house or to allow senators to take personal responsibility for their actions.

All of which was compressed down to this scant line of text, the original version of Article I, Section 3, Clause 1

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

In 1913, the 17th Amendment changed that version to this one, which still exists today:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.

For nearly 150 years the system was set, the state legislators elected the US Senators from their own states. Because the US Senate was created to represent THE STATES to the federal government, and the US House was to represent The People. 106 years ago, the people demanded that THEY should have the right to directly elect those US Senators, and they got what they wanted. A century later, the people of the United States believe — and every US Senator tells them so — that the US Senate now represents THE PEOPLE, just as the House does. 

In which case, it seems only logical to see how the Constitution, the States and the people all see the US Senate has changed over the years. The same logic can be applied to the electoral college, another anachronism left-over from an earlier era, and no longer working as it should in the modern age. 

The Electoral College 

The United States Constitution provides for the election of the president and vice president by an electoral college. Electors cast ballots on the basis of the popular vote in each state. 

The entire section of the Constitution which applies to the electoral college: Article II, Section 1, Clauses 2-4

Each state gets a number of Electors equal to it’s US House Reps + 2 (for the US Senators). BUT no sitting member of Congress or anyone holding “an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States” may be one of those electors.

Congress sets a day (which day shall be the same throughout the United States) for all Electors to meet after the national popular vote takes place in all of the states. They meet with the other electors chosen in their state and cast a ballot for president and one for vice president, at least one of whom cannot live in their state. 

The National Popular Vote Compact is a state-based legal argument to change how the United States selects its president each four years. But the change is a small one and 12 States (13 when Colorado’s Governor Jared Polis signs the Bill on his desk soon, as he has publicly indicated he will) have already joined the Compact. 

The front page of the NPV Compact, it’s rather self-explanatory and easy to understand. 

This is the text of the Washington State Law enacting the NPV Compact, and if your state has already joined the compact, you’ll find it exactly the same because part of the Compact requires that each state which joins must enact the EXACT SAME TEXT.

RCW 29A.56.300 States' agreement—Presidential election—National popular vote

ARTICLE I - Membership Any state of the United States and the District of Columbia may become a member of this agreement by enacting this agreement. ARTICLE II - Right of the People to Vote Each member state shall conduct a statewide popular election for president and vice president of the United States. ARTICLE III - Manner of Appointing Presidential Electors in Member States     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 determine the number of votes for each presidential slate in each state of the United States and in the District of Columbia in which votes have been cast in a statewide popular election and shall add such votes together to produce a "national popular vote total" for each presidential slate.     The chief election official of each member state shall designate the presidential slate with the largest national popular vote total as the "national popular vote winner."     The presidential elector certifying official of each member state shall certify the appointment in that official's own state of the elector slate nominated in that state in association with the national popular vote winner.     At least six days before the day fixed by law for the meeting and voting by the presidential electors, each member state shall make a final determination of the number of popular votes cast in the state for each presidential slate and shall communicate an official statement of such determination within twenty-four hours to the chief election official of each other member state.     The chief election official of each member state shall treat as conclusive an official statement containing the number of popular votes in a state for each presidential slate made by the day established by federal law for making a state's final determination conclusive as to the counting of electoral votes by congress.     In event of a tie for the national popular vote winner, the presidential elector certifying official of each member state shall certify the appointment of the elector slate nominated in association with the presidential slate receiving the largest number of popular votes within that official's own state.     If, for any reason, the number of presidential electors nominated in a member state in association with the national popular vote winner is less than or greater than that state's number of electoral votes, the presidential candidate on the presidential slate that has been designated as the national popular vote winner shall have the power to nominate the presidential electors for that state and that state's presidential elector certifying official shall certify the appointment of such nominees.     The chief election official of each member state shall immediately release to the public all vote counts or statements of votes as they are determined or obtained.     This article shall govern the appointment of presidential electors in each member state in any year in which this agreement is, on July 20, in effect in states cumulatively possessing a majority of the electoral votes. ARTICLE IV - Other Provisions     This agreement shall take effect when states cumulatively possessing a majority of the electoral votes have enacted this agreement in substantially the same form and the enactments by such states have taken effect in each state.     Any member state may withdraw from this agreement, except that a withdrawal occurring six months or less before the end of a president's term shall not become effective until a president or vice president shall have been qualified to serve the next term.     The chief executive of each member state shall promptly notify the chief executive of all other states of when this agreement has been enacted and has taken effect in that official's state, when the state has withdrawn from this agreement, and when this agreement takes effect generally.     This agreement shall terminate if the electoral college is abolished.     If any provision of this agreement is held invalid, the remaining provisions shall not be affected. The Compact Enacted 

According to the NationalPopularVote.com website, this is the status of the Compact: 

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

It has been enacted into law in 12 states with 172 electoral votes (CA, CT, DC, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WA). 

The bill will take effect when enacted by states with 98 more electoral votes.  

It has passed at least one house in 11 additional states with 89 electoral votes (AR, AZ, CO, DE, ME, MI, NC, NM, NV, OK, OR)  and has been approved unanimously by committee votes in two additional states with 26 electoral votes (GA, MO).

The bill has recently been passed by a 40–16 vote in the Republican-controlled Arizona House, 28–18 in Republican-controlled Oklahoma Senate, 57–4 in Republican-controlled New York Senate, 34-23 in Democratic-controlled Oregon House, and 26-16 in the New Mexico Senate.  

Imagine for a moment, the entire world, if the Compact had been in effect in the year 2000.

Al Gore was president when 9/11 happened — or perhaps Al listened to Mr Clarke and others attempting to warn him about Osama bin Laden and his terrorist plans to attack the United States well before that fateful PDB (presidential daily briefing) of August 2001 was ever printed. The one whose title was, “Bin laden determined to strike in U.S.”

That is of course alternative history. 

But future presidential elections could be more reflective of the collective wishes of The People of the United States. The power the few citizens in the low population states have held over the vast numbers of the citizens in the more populous states, as regards the choice of President, would be diminished. As it should be. Because our Constitution begins with WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and that is who should choose our president every four years. All of the people, combined, should become ‘out of many, one’ in the manner of selecting our executive, the single person in whom the manifest authority of the most powerful nation on the face of the Earth exists. 

Per the header image, from this story US States - Ranked by Population 2019 

These are the numbers, in groups of 5 states, most to least populous plus District of Columbia:

States in descending population		Population	Percent of total population
1-5 [CA, TX, FL, NY, PA]		122,479,872	37.340%
6-10 [Il, OH, GA, NC, MI]		55,389,448	16.886%
11-15 [NJ, VA, WA, AZ, MA]		39,108,899	11.922%
16-20 [TN, IN, MS, MD, WI]		31,515,732	9.608%
21-25 [CO, MN, SC, AL, LA]		25,972,737	7.918%
26-30 [KY, OR, OK, CT, IA]		19,361,585	5.902%
31-35 [UT, NV, AR, MS, KS]		15,137,796	4.615%
36-40 [NM, NE, WV, ID, HI]		9,006,587	2.745%
41-45 [NH, ME, MT, RI, DE]		5,787,379	1.764%
46-50 [SD, ND, AK, VT, WY]		3,568,776	1.088%
D.C.		703,608	0.214%
Total combined 1-25		274,466,688	83.7% of total population
Total combined 26-50		52,862,123	16.1% of total population
D.C.		703,608	.2% of total population
Total population 2019		328,012,419	100%

When you see it BY THE NUMBERS, the absolute need to shift to choosing our President by the total votes of all of the people, combined, makes a lot of sense.

Those small population states will STILL have equal (not proportional) representation in the US Senate, with 2 US Senators for each of them, to represent the STATE’s interests. 

But when it comes to the one Office which represents ALL of the people in ALL of the states EQUALLY, logic says that the National Popular Vote Compact is the very best path to reach this  significant and necessary change in HOW we choose the Leader of our Republic. 

Please check the NationalPopularVote.com website and see the information for YOUR state. If it has not joined the Compact, please contact your Statehouse representatives and request they write a Bill and join the NPV Compact as soon as possible. There is STILL time to get a fully effective Compact BEFORE the 2020 election if you all help make it happen.