Democratic victories in several key states have revived the possibility that the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could reach the 270 electoral-vote threshold needed to take effect before the 2028 presidential election.
Axios reported Wednesday that Democrats gained control of the governorship and both legislative chambers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada following the midterm elections.
Those gains could give Democrats enough power in the five states to advance [1] legislation joining the compact, an agreement designed to award participating states’ electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.
The Electoral College would remain formally intact under the proposal. However, the compact only becomes operational after participating states collectively control at least 270 electoral votes, the number required to win the presidency.
At present, 18 states and Washington, D.C., have enacted the compact, accounting for 222 electoral votes.
If Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Nevada all joined, the total represented by participating jurisdictions could rise to 283 electoral votes, putting the compact above the required threshold.
Such a development would dramatically change the practical operation of presidential elections without formally abolishing the Electoral College through a constitutional amendment.
Under the compact, states would agree to direct their electors toward the candidate who received the most votes nationwide rather than necessarily toward the candidate who won the popular vote within that individual state.
Supporters argue that the arrangement would make every presidential vote carry the same weight regardless of geography and ensure that the candidate receiving the most votes nationally wins the White House.
“The Electoral College may have died yesterday.”
Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov celebrate the idea of ending the Electoral College deciding the US president.
Galloway: “The National Popular Vote Compact basically does away with the Electoral College.”
“Democracy has been perverted to a small number of states.”
“Last night, the three Republican states that went all blue in terms of their legislature and their governor needed to go over 270, elected Democrats across the board.”
“We stop obsessing over and spending $3,000 for every soccer mom in some town in Wisconsin.”
Tarlov: “it seems great. And it’s also logical, which would be a good thing to be able to be logical in the way that we elect people.”
Galloway and Tarlov want to “pervert” the Constitution and strip the voice of Americans in smaller states.
Democrats want to abolish the EC entirely, but this is how they try to subvert it in the meantime.
“Raging Moderates”
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) November 6, 2026 [2]
The debate, however, also raises questions about the role of individual states in the presidential election system.
The United States is made up of 50 states with separate governments, political interests, and constitutional responsibilities. The Electoral College reflects that federal structure by assigning presidential electors on a state-by-state basis.
The difference between Rhode Island and California illustrates one of the concerns raised by opponents of a national popular-vote system.
Rhode Island has a population of roughly 1 million people, while California has nearly 40 million more residents.
Critics of the compact argue that presidential candidates operating under a national popular-vote model could have less incentive to focus on smaller states and their specific interests because larger population centers would offer far greater numbers of potential votes.
States such as California, Texas and Florida would contain enormous concentrations of voters, while smaller states could see their role in presidential campaigning diminish.
Supporters counter that the current system gives individual voters different levels of practical influence depending on where they live and that a national vote would treat each ballot equally.
The dispute therefore involves more than simply counting votes. It also concerns the balance between individual voters and the states as political units within the federal system.
Legal questions could also complicate any attempt to activate the compact.
The Constitution gives state legislatures authority over the appointment of presidential electors, but whether states can enter into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact without congressional approval remains disputed.
Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller has argued that the Constitution’s Compact Clause requires Congress to approve such an arrangement.
If the compact reaches 270 electoral votes, that dispute could lead to a major court battle over whether participating states can collectively alter the practical method of choosing a president without passing a constitutional amendment.
Political control alone also does not guarantee that all five newly Democratic-controlled states will join.
Axios noted that Michigan failed to enact the compact during a previous Democratic trifecta from 2023 through 2024.
Nevada also considered similar legislation in 2019, but the state’s Democratic governor at the time vetoed the measure because of concerns about how it could affect Nevada’s political influence.
Those examples show that support for the compact does not always fall strictly along party lines and that Democratic control of a state government does not automatically result in adoption.
Still, the latest midterm results have substantially changed the political landscape surrounding the proposal.
With Democrats controlling the governorship and both legislative chambers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada, supporters of the compact now have potential paths forward in enough states to push the agreement past 270 electoral votes.
If all five states joined, the participating jurisdictions would collectively represent 283 electoral votes.
That would put the compact into effect and make the national popular vote the determining factor in how those states award their presidential electors.
The development could set up one of the most consequential legal and political battles ahead of the 2028 election.
At issue would be whether states can use their constitutional authority over presidential electors to effectively turn the Electoral College into a mechanism for enforcing the national popular vote, or whether doing so requires congressional approval or a constitutional amendment.
After sweeping Democratic victories in several battleground states, that once-theoretical question may now be much closer to becoming a real fight.