A court ruling just changed how we pick our president

[onenote]

47. Actually, you said it would 'end' the EC 'indirectly.'

Of course, it really wouldn't. There would still be an EC. There could still be faithless electors if the 10th Circuit ruling isn't overturned.

I don't need for you to do any research on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NIC) -- I've been following it for a very long time. The supporters claim that faithless electors won't be a problem for the following reasons: (1) faithless electors are rare; (2) state laws (or a federal law) could bar faithless electors; and (3) the margins of victory would make it highly unlikely that faithless electors could change the outcome of an election once the NIC goes into effect.

The problem with those explanations are: (1) if faithless electors are rare (and they have been) then the NIC won't really change things in that regard; (2) the court case calls into question whether such laws would withstand judicial review; and (3) if all states or states representing a sizable majority of the EC votes joined the NIC then it would make it very difficult for faithless electors to change the outcome. But by its terms the NIC will take effect when it is approved by states representing a bare majority (270) of the electoral college. And its likely that if and when the NIC takes effect it will be by a small margin since no state that voted for Trump has signed on to the NIC. So in theory, the NIC could take effect and still result in a close EC vote that could be undone by a handful of faithless electors. Apart from GWB's narrow victory, the margins in most elections under the current system also have been large enough (in the modern era) to make it unlikely that a faithless electors will change the outcome.

My point isn't that the EC is a good system. It's absolutely not. But the court ruling on faithless electors doesn't really change anything when it comes to arguments for or against the NIC or the current system. The NIC is to be preferred over the current system not because of anything having to do with faithless electors) but because it is the closest we can get to popular vote basis for choosing the president short of a constitutional amendment.