Why Janet Mills should veto the national popular vote

By Matthew Gagnon

Fireworks erupted Tuesday on the floor of the Maine House of Representatives, as the final push to pass a bill that would have Maine join the National Popular Vote Compact moved forward. The day had everything: accusations of underhanded politicking, fiery floor speeches, irate members looking for absent members and, in the end, a result decided by a single vote. 

For anyone confused as to why we are talking about this again, don’t feel bad. Confusion is the name of the game in government sausage-making. You may remember my column on the bill from mid-January, in which I more-or-less begged the Legislature to see reason and reject the bill. 

The Legislature didn’t listen, of course. You may recall that this measure has already run through the Legislature this year, in concurrence — in other words, in identical form — between both chambers, causing most people to believe that the fate of the bill had already been decided. But it hadn’t been, because the legislative process dictates that there is a subsequent vote to be held on the “enactment” of a bill, which is necessary before it goes to the governor’s desk. 

After the initial passage, most of us expected enactment to happen right away. After all, if they had the votes once, why wouldn’t they have them again? And yet the vote was delayed for some reason, and two weeks ago, the House decided to table the bill, despite the Democrats having what appeared to be the numbers necessary to pass it again. 

Rumors swirled as to what was really happening. There were whispers that some members may be changing their votes due to the ongoing dispute within Democratic circles as to whether to pass the bill outright or send the question to voters. Others speculated that Gov. Janet Mills was telling Democratic leaders to quietly kill the bill. No one really knew, but something was clearly going on. 

Whatever was happening was resolved by Tuesday. In the end, House Democrats prevailed by a single vote, 73-72. The bill now goes to the Senate where it is almost certain to pass, and then it will land on Mills’ desk for signature. 

When it does, she needs to veto it. 

Before we go any further, let’s admit a plain truth about the Electoral College: Republicans generally like it because they believe that it materially benefits them in national elections, while Democrats dislike it because they think that it puts them at a disadvantage. That, not high-minded philosophy, is likely why you see Democrats moving to push a bill that would advance the country toward a national popular vote, and Republicans opposing it. If the shoe were on the other foot, it is virtually guaranteed that you would see the two rival parties taking the opposite positions. 

Here’s the thing about making broad changes to institutions based on the short-term (today) advantage it gives you: things change. Remember when Democrats changed the filibuster rules in the Senate in order to ram through Obama-era judicial appointees? Well, that precedent is why the Supreme Court now has a 6-to-3 conservative majority on it, as Republicans took full advantage.

Regarding the Electoral College, it is certainly true that Democrats have twice lost the White House in the last 20 years, despite getting more votes nationwide than Republicans. In fact, over the last six presidential elections, the Democratic candidate has won more popular votes than the Republican candidate five times. But will this last forever?

History says no. Between 1968 and 1988, the opposite happened. Republicans won more popular votes than Democrats five times, with only Jimmy Carter interrupting the trend in 1976.

And be careful of believing that either party is winning more popular votes in any era simply because they are more popular. Remember that in this latest “losing streak” Republican candidates haven’t been trying to win a majority of the popular votes across the country, they have been trying to win states that give them an Electoral College advantage. If the election was a simple popularity contest, they would’ve run entirely different campaigns, and we will never know how successful those campaigns would’ve been. 

Perhaps you think the popular vote is a good idea. Even if it is, the National Popular Vote Compact is an unmitigated logistical disaster waiting to happen, and will create legal chaos exponentially worse than anything we’ve ever seen in this country. 

If we are truly to make this change, it needs to be done via a constitutional amendment. Mills must veto this legislation.

Gagnon of Yarmouth is the chief executive officer of the Maine Policy Institute, a free market policy think tank based in Portland. A Hampden native, he previously served as a senior strategist for the Republican Governors Association in Washington, D.C.