As Pennsylvanians consider what a Democratic trifecta will mean in Harrisburg, one item that may have slipped through their cracks is the National Popular Vote Compact.
The what?
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who
receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
It would apply the one-person-one-vote principle to presidential elections and make every vote equal and replace the Electoral College.
As we well know in the Keystone State, not every state is equal when it comes to presidential elections. The current system provides for a “winner-take-all” victory that awards all of a state’s Electoral College votes to the candidate receiving the most popular votes in that particular state.
In 2024. 94 percent of the general-election campaign events took place in seven states, including Pennsylvania. In our Commonwealth alone, the last three presidential elections were decided by a total of 245,113 votes. An average of only 279,628 popular votes spread over an average of three closely divided states has decided the last seven presidential elections.
| Year | Candidates | Vote Difference |
| 2024 | Donald Trump (R) vs. Kamala Harris (D) | R+120,266 |
| 2020 | Joe Biden (D) vs. Donald Trump (R) | D+80,555 |
| 2016 | Donald Trump (R) vs. Hillary Clinton (D) | R+44,292 |
With that in mind, five of the country’s 47 Presidents have entered office without winning the most popular votes nationwide:
The winner-take-all idea is not in the U.S. Constitution. It was not mentioned at the Constitutional Convention nor in the Federalist Papers. In fact, the first time it was used in our country was in 1880.
What the U.S. Constitution does provide is a way for states to reform the system, as Article II gives them exclusive control over the choice of method of awarding their electoral votes. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes – that is, 270 of the 538.
As of today, 19 states have enacted the Compact into law:
and the District of Columbia (3). These jurisdictions combine for 222 of the needed 270 to activate the law.
In addition to Pennsylvania, voters in four other states gave Democrats trifectas last week with majorities in both houses of the legislature, as well as the governor’s office – Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. Those five states combine for 61 electoral votes and could make the difference in making the Compact law.
Michigan failed to enact the Compact during its previous Democratic trifecta from 2023 to 2024, while Nevada’s then-Democratic governor vetoed the compact in 2019, warning it could diminish his state’s influence over presidential elections.
Gov. Josh Shapiro remains open to the idea.
“I’ll work with lawmakers to figure out what the right mechanism is for moving forward on that,” the governor said on the podcast, “Pod Save America.” “But look, we’re the ultimate swing state in Pennsylvania … I think Pennsylvania can still play a massive role even in a national popular vote,” Shapiro said.
That will be the $64,000 question.
There is belief that the Compact requires congressional consent. There is a question on how Pennsylvania chooses its electors when other states are making the decision for the Commonwealth.
And voters are treated differently by each state. It is not a national standard. And how does the state Constitution come into play?
Finally, American elections are not designed to cross state lines, as the U.S. is a nation of states, a federal republic, by constitutional design.
Trent England, the founder and executive director of Save Our States, a conservative policy nonprofit that advocates for defending the Electoral College, says the Compact is totally unworkable and harms states and voters.
“It is dangerous because it ignores the practical reality of presidential elections within America’s federal system,” he said.
