The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Comes to Minnesota
February 8, 2023
The Minnesota legislature has been very active as of late, introducing bills on a wide range of topics including cannabis legalization, finance and lending regulations, and election reform.
The election reform bill proposed in the Minnesota House of Representatives is named House File 642. House File 642 is described as an agreement among the states to elect the president by national popular vote and it is backed by authors Freiberg, Bahner, Long, Kraft, Greenman, Curran, Brand, Frazier, Garofalo, Hollins, Hemmingsen-Jaeger.
House File 642 was introduced on January 23 of this year and has been read in two committees throughout the last month. Most recently, it was read in the Elections, Finance, and Policy Committee.
Minnesota would join 15 other states and the District of Columbia as jurisdictions which have passed the interstate compact if the bill is successful. A successful passage of the bill would take the proposal one step closer to electing the president by a national popular vote, shifting the method of election away from the traditional method of using the electoral college.
The states which have already passed the bill vary in both population and geographic region; they include states such as Delaware, New York, Hawaii, Colorado, and California. Fellow midwestern state Illonois has already passed the bill as well.
Currently, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact holds 195 electoral votes, and needs a total of 270 electoral votes for the interstate compact to go into effect. This would be a historic change in the way Americans elect the president, and supporters of the compact opine that it is a much needed one.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact’s website offers a thorough explanation of the bill, discusses common misconceptions on the topic, and encourages citizens to contact their legislators in support of the bill. Proponents of the bill focus on the shortcomings of the current winner-take-all system and state that the interstate compact addresses these issues.
Supporters of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact believe it “evens the playing field” so that all states receive equal attention in campaigns from their presidential candidates, and citizens from certain areas of the country are not ostracized by way of not living in a battleground state.
Others support the bill because they believe the interstate compact brings the power back to the people, a power vested in the people by the constitution of the United States.
Objections to the bill include the bill is a straying from tradition and the constitution, Republicans would be ostracized, and cities would be unfairly favored and control the election.
This type of election reform has become the center of a contentious debate among politicians, with opinions varying based on political affiliation.
Generally, Democrats are in favor of a national popular vote, and Republicans are opposed to it, and typical partisan politics will definitely play a part in the passage or failure of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
There are many bills in front of the Minnesota legislature in this new year, and only time will tell when Minnesotans will receive a definite answer on the matter of a national popular vote for president. Government officials will need the time to examine the bill, weigh the pros and cons, and articulate those points to the public and their colleagues. This process could take a while.
Election reform of this magnitude and importance should not be taken lightly, and Minnesota legislators have a significant decision to make and have the ability to influence the course of Minnesotan and American political history with their decision.
The Minnesota Republic will be closely monitoring the status of this bill, and will continue reporting on it throughout the journey of the bill.
To stay up-to-date on the status of this bill and others, you can use the Minnesota House of Representatives’ website.
Loading ...
Peter Lee • Apr 1, 2023 at 8:48 am
Folks seem to be saying the same thing, that a National Popular vote makes every vote equal. That’s not a true statement. Votes in different states are created with different systems. You can’t add a wide receiver stats in football to his catching stats in baseball. The games have different rules. There is no National popular vote. It is a media creation. It is entirely nonsense to add votes from different voting systems with different rules together and count them as equals. Since the beginning of our nation, when people vote for president they vote for a slate of electors in their states. The only thing adopting a national popular vote does is disenfranchise voters in your state. If they vote against the majority, their votes will be changed and they will be disenfranchised. If they vote with the majority, then nothing changes.
Andrew Arensburger • Feb 10, 2023 at 10:28 pm
>Republicans would be ostracized,
This doesn’t make sense. This bill doesn’t favor or disfavor any party.
>and cities would be unfairly favored
How so? Under this bill, a city vote would be counted the same way as a country vote, the same way as today. Do cities have an unfair advantage in gubernatorial or Senate elections?
>and control the election.
The top 20 cities in the US have something like 30% of the population. Even if you could somehow convince every city dweller to vote for the same candidate, that candidate still wouldn’t win without a whole lot of suburban and rural votes.
Susan Anthony • Feb 9, 2023 at 12:33 pm
On April 18, 2007, Minnesota State Representative Steve Simon first introduced the National Popular Vote bill into the Minnesota Legislature.
There have been 16 years to examine the bill, weigh the pros and cons, and articulate those points to the public and their colleagues. It’s time to enact the bill.
In 2021, the bill was introduced in the Minnesota Senate. and House. Senators and Representatives introduced the National Popular Vote interstate compact in the form of a constitutional amendment.
In 2019, the Minnesota House of Representatives passed an omnibus bill containing the bill by a 73-58 vote. The House actually passed a different House omnibus bill . The 2019 legislative session ended with no bill being enacted into law.
On April 3, 2019, a hearing was held on an omnibus election bill containing the bill.
In March 2019, a Representative introduced the bill into the Minnesota House.
In January 2019, A Senator introduced the bill into the Minnesota Senate. And, Senators introduced a similar bill.
In January 2019, Representatives introduced the bill.
In 2017, the bill was introduced into the Minnesota Senate.
In 2017, Representatives introduced the bill into the House.
And Senators introduced the bill
In 2013, the Elections Committee of the Minnesota House of Representatives approved the bill
In 2013, the bill was introduced in the Minnesota House of Representatives and the Minnesota Senate.
In 2011, the Minnesota house Committee on Government Operations and Elections approved the bill
In 2011, the bill was introduced by Representatives The 18 sponsors include 7 Republicans and 11 Democrats. Senators Ray Vandeveer and Anne (R) and Ann H. Rest (D) introduced the bill in the Senate in 2011.
In 2009, the bill was introduced in Minnesota by Representatives and was introduced in the Minnesota Senate
A survey of 800 Minnesota voters conducted on January 15-16, 2009 showed 75% overall support for a national popular vote for President. Support was 84% among Democrats, 69% among Republicans, and 68% among others. By age, support was 74% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 77% among 46-65 year olds, and 75% for those older than 65. By gender, support was 83% among women and 67% among men. By race, support was 76% among whites (representing 91% of respondents), 60% among African Americans (representing 3% of respondents), and 63% among others (representing 6% of respondents). The survey was conducted on January 15-16, 2009, had a margin or error of plus or minus 3 1/2%.