A long-standing effort to bypass the Electoral College without a formal constitutional amendment is nearing a critical tipping point as the 2024 elections approach. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), an agreement among states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, currently sits just 48 votes short of the 270 required to take effect.
Under the current system mandated by the U.S. Constitution, presidents are elected state by state. However, the NPVIC seeks to change those mechanics through a binding agreement between participating jurisdictions. To date, 18 states and the District of Columbia have signed the compact into law, representing a combined 222 electoral votes. The most recent addition occurred in April of this year when Virginia joined the compact following the establishment of a new Democratic trifecta in the state government.
Advocates for the change argue that it ensures the presidency is won by the candidate who receives the most individual votes nationwide. Opponents, however, describe the move as a strategic shift designed to consolidate political power in high-population metropolitan centers such as New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, potentially diminishing the influence of diverse swing states.
The upcoming November elections could provide the remaining momentum needed to activate the compact. Political analysts and advocacy groups are closely watching races in Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In all four states, Democrats currently hold governorships and are competing to win control of the state legislatures. If Democrats achieve “trifectas” in these states, they could collectively bring 55 additional electoral votes into the compact. Furthermore, if Nevada elects a Democratic governor, another six votes could be added to the tally, pushing the total well beyond the 270-vote threshold.
In Arizona, Governor Katie Hobbs has previously co-sponsored pro-NPVIC legislation during her tenure in the state Senate. Similarly, in Wisconsin, Democratic legislative leaders have supported NPVIC measures this year, anticipating that a shift in legislative control could pave the way for the state’s entry into the agreement. Such a development would set the stage for a major shift in how the 2028 presidential election is conducted.
Beyond the political math, the compact faces significant legal and constitutional hurdles. Critics argue that the plan bypasses the formal amendment process, which requires broad public and legislative support across the country. There are also questions regarding the Compact Clause of the Constitution, which generally requires congressional consent for agreements between states.
Concerns have also been raised regarding election integrity and the standardization of voting laws. Opponents of the compact, including Jason Snead of Honest Elections Project Action, argue that the NPVIC could trigger a “race to the bottom” as states compete to produce the highest raw ballot counts. They point to variations in state laws regarding automatic voter registration, voter ID requirements, mail-in ballot deadlines, and third-party ballot collection as potential sources of friction in a nationalized count.
Even some early proponents of the concept have acknowledged the potential for volatility. Yale professor Akhil Amar, who contributed to the early foundations of the NPVIC, has compared the potential for a resulting constitutional crisis to a “doomsday machine.”
If the compact is activated by 2028, it is expected to face immediate and extensive litigation. Historically, some Democratic leaders have resisted the push; in 2019, then-Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak issued a veto against joining the compact. Whether current Democratic leaders in battleground states will follow that precedent or yield to the growing pressure from their base remains a central question of the 2024 cycle.
