A four-year-old effort that effectively would turn the Electoral College out to pasture in the United States by arranging a direct vote of president by the people is gaining strength, and is poised to claim support from states that control 106 of the 270 votes now needed to claim the Oval Office.
The total might be even higher already.
But that has a number of analysts alarmed, including author Tara Ross, who has written in opposition to the concept of a direct national vote for president at the Save Our States.com website.
"Eliminating the Electoral College would probably mean at least two things: Elections will become easier to steal and the two-party system will be undermined. So it follows that two types of political parties would benefit the most: Those that don't mind stealing elections and third parties," she wrote.
The California-based National Popular Vote has been working since about 2006 on its plan that would assign Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who has captured the most individual votes in a presidential election nationwide – no matter who has won in an individual state.
The Electoral College system now assigns votes by the state – or in a couple of cases by the congressional district – based on the popular vote in that state or district. This is the circumstance that gave George W. Bush the presidency in 2000 even though Al Gore collected more popular votes.
It is being promoted in state legislatures – it has been introduced in all 50 – as a compact among the states in which legislators commit their state's votes to the popular vote winner as soon as there are enough states to guarantee a victor with 270 ElectoralCollege votes.
So far, Hawaii, with 4 votes; New Jersey, 15; Illinois, 20; Maryland, 10; and Washington, 11; have made commitments. As of now, there are active bills that could put another three states in that camp: New York, 31; Massachusetts, 12; and Delaware, 3.
That would total 106 of the needed 270 Electoral College votes.
Spokesman Barry Fadem told WND the move would help small states and other "flyover" regions where political candidates don't usually campaign because a vote is a vote wherever, and advertising and such would be less expensive in rural areas.
He said the compact among the states is perfectly legitimate because the Founding Fathers gave to the state legislatures the responsibility to determine the allocation of Electoral College votes.
"Why would a presidential candidate campaign in Hawaii or Alaska? The reason is because every vote would count," he said.
However, Ross, who has written, "Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College," said in a National Review analysis that the campaign is coming "startlingly close to success even as most Americans remain completely unaware that the presidential-election process is so close to being turned on its head."
Read more about this