Welcome, everyone. It is really tremendous to see so many people in the room for what is a really important issue. It does not get enough tension. For the next hour were going to focus on the peculiar way we choose or president. Not by direct selection of our people, but indirect manner. Electors who then go through process to select our president. Louder. Okay. Can you hear me now if i speak like this . Okay. The election of duty experience that was disheartening in other ways with our panelists will get into, but it was not an election aimed at the entire country. It was an election aimed at about a dozen battleground states if you did not live in a battleground state. You were essentially a bystander in the election. The experience has led many people to ask why. Why do we continue to have this system and what are the processfect proces prospects of doing something about it. Im going to speak about the Electoral College. The constitution sets the rules of the college. To become president you have to win a majority of the total Electoral College votes. And if no one gets a majority, in an extremely undemocratic feature of the constitution, the election would go to the house of representatives in an election, a runoff where every state gets one vote. So california and vermont get one vote. You may surprised to learn that it does not require people vote for president and does not limit the way states can choose their electors. State legislatures have complete authority and power to choose electors in a way they see fit. For the last century and a half, that has meant separate elections in each state where the state basically award their electors to the candidate that wins the election in that state. Northwestly on a winner take all basis. The states expect the elector to vote for the candidate who won in the state a month later, but the constitution does not require this. An electors do sometimes cast blots for people who are not voted not selected by the people in that skate. There really is nothing to stop them. Some states pose a fine for electors who dont vote for the candidate elected by the people. You may ask why did the framers of the constitution invent such a system. You need to go back to the world of 1787. It was a product of many compromises. Have to understand the four special interests that were placated by the Electoral College. It gave state legislature us a role in the Selection Process because they choose the electors. It protected smaller states against the bigger states the same way the senate gives a little extra support to small states in our legislature. It protected the slave south against the north because the system of choosing electoral votes depends in part on the number of representatives a state has. Finally the Electoral College reassured people who couldnt conceive or were worried about having direct democracy on a nationwide scale. Its something that had never been tried. They really liked the idea that electors would get together and deliberate among candidates and they actually thought that the elections would often gogh to the house of representatives, but the system did not the system that we have is smk they never would have envisioned. So with that, i want to say many people dislike the Electoral College, but the question is are we stuck with it . There have been attempts to amend the constitution to get rid of it. That has proved difficult to do. Today were going to hear about some other ideas, including a very interesting strategy that could move the country to a National Popular vote system without the challenge and burden of trying to amend the constitution. So with that, were going to turn to an amazing panel who is going to explain some of this for us. To my left, we have pat who is a Senior Consultant with the group National Popular vote. A lawyer who also works with the group make every vote count. And for those of you are there dont need to introduce. Apart from awarding the victory from the candidate who does not win the most vote, why is electing the president through the Electoral College and big problem and what is your organization doing about it. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. Im not sure the Electoral College is the problem. Right. I think the state based winner take all laws which is how 48 states in the district of columbia are using that power, that is the problem. If i were to leave here and flying to minneapolis saint paul and five out of 58 times my plane landed in chicago, you can see how that would be inconvenient. Certainly when it comes to electing the leader of the free world, five out of 58 elections under a system that allows that to happen, leads to significant c crises. My disclosure to you is im a conservative republicans trapped behind the blue wall in the state of minnesota and while im not concerned about the results of the last president ial election, my primary concern with the Current System is that in every president ial election, right, threefourths of the voters in this country feel like theyre politically irrelevant when theyre electing the leader of their country. That is problematic in everything election. Its a problem worth addressing. You know, exhibit a of that would be in the 2012 president ial election, Everybody Knows what a battleground state is. Its a closely divided state. Ohio is a swing state in every president ial contest in my lifetime. 73 general Election Campaign events in the battle graugrounde of ohio in the 2012 president ial election. The voters of ohio were very, very, very important to both the republican, Democratic Candidates for president. During that election, 23 reliably republican state and 15 reliably democratic states were wholly ignored. The political interest of the voters of the state were irrelevant to the american president and that has dramatic consequences. You know as it relates to people feeling like they have a real stake in american president ial elections. In 12 states. Three quarters of that campaign occurred in six states including pennsylvania, michigan, and wisconsin that donald trump needed to win in order to be elected president under the legislate system that candidates run under because of the state based winner take all law. Now article two section one of the United States constitution allows do you change that system through state legislative action. It says each state shall appoint in such manner as the legislature there may direct a number of electors interested in reforming the Current System state action is the ware to go. The system was adopted over time. Simple state laws get replaced with state laws. Okay. So the real shortcoming of the Current System in my mind and as a republican in minnesota i cant think of a single redeeming quality of the Current System. Is problem is in every president ial election if youre a battleground state voter you get what you want from the american president and the rest of us are forced to deal with that. We happen to be in reliably republican or democratic states. Okay. So the real shortcoming, right, is that two few voters feel valued, a legislate value in terms the of participation in president ial campaigns, whether youre a democratic in la or republican in minnesota you feel under valued in president ial campaigns. That impacts Public Policy. If you think thats a little thing, my conservative friends, think about the republican president that passed a trillion dollar Prescription Drug benefit to appease the voters of the i 34 quarter of florida in a essential swing state and president ial elections. These arent little decisions that get made. Theyre big sessions that get made. The National Popular vote interstate exact in my last 30 minutes. What it does is asks you to ask your legislature 30 seconds. What did i say. I want to thank the rest of the panel for being here. No, but National Popular vote what it is is agreement amongst the state that uses the power under article 2 section one of the constitution. Asks the legislature if they want to award electors on the basis of the National Popular vote. When states with 270 or more have this law in place, it triggers. Guarantees the presidency to the National Popular vote winner. And it is the constitutionally appropriate way to make every voter in every state politically relevant in every president ial election and i dont care what jersey you wear, thats an important thing to do. So as pat explained, the system is broken. So i work with a group called making every vote count. As a gloroup we decided is the National Popular vote. Its the best solution and most achievable solution at this time. You know, the problems that people are ignored during campaigns and as pat said that extends to policy outcomes after the election. We think one of the best ways to demonstrate the problem is to think about how things would be different under a National Popular vote. Think of a policy that is of interest to you. And a majority of the country thinks needs to billion acted on and isnt going anywhere now. How that would be resolved more productively with president ial leadership on that issue. Weve come up with three general examples. First, with president ial leadership, you would see a nationwide focus on infrastructure. The government would fix roads and bridges and dams everywhere. And repair the damage from hurricanes and floods and fires all over the country and it wouldnt just focus on battleground states, which is what tends to happen now. Second, you would see a National Focus on health care. The government would expand medicaid in every state and on an equal basis. Third, you might see affordable broad band nationwide. The government would be more incentivized to provide affordable broad band to high and low come homes in rural and urban areas. This is evidenced by the recent controversial five g plan released by the Trump Administration recently. Theyre focusing on rural areas which are trumpss baitse. Youre going to see a focus on rural areas in red or purple states where as a place like new york which is rural economically disadvantaged, but in a blue state no incentive for the administration to focus on them. So they are launching an Education Campaign to spread the word about these problems and the need for reform. Using the internet, social immediate and soon to be launched Online Video Campaign which ill talk more about later and we here i have two colleagues here. Theyre here with me. We want to hear your ideas about what think is effective in your states. And the need for reform. So larry, youre working to advance the exact as well, but youre bringing some innovative litigation strategies in addition to other advocacy strategies. Can you tell us about what your organization is doing. First, i just want to remark on something you should notice about this extraordinary conference. Joshs vision, i think the vision represented to us that we could weave together a conversation that would include people of fundamentally different political views who come to a common agreement about fundamental issues basically constitutional issues about how our republic should work. If we can agree on it, the question is what would the solution b. I also agree that the move that both pats group and the make every vote count. Despite the enlightened view of some, there are many people who are entrenched in their view that this system needs to stay. And the exact so far is 165 electors committed. Hes got 105 more to go before it gets to the place that can actually be triggered. What were concerned about is that if the status quo is allowed to remain status quo, nothing is going to make that happen. What we thought we would do is compliment this movement by shaking up the foundations a bit. I cant guarantee, i think were 90 certain that next friday well be filing a lawsuit, the boys firm is doing the litigation for us, in four states. Two read states, two blue states, challenging winner take all under the principal of one person vote. The problem is winner take all. That is a state created problem. The Supreme Court had said again, and, again, and, again, that the president election system is subject to the prin principle of one person, one vote. We have existing law, most recently bush versus gore that opens this door for us, to say they ought to require states allocate proportion. Proportional allocation is not as good as their idea. Still not perfectly one person one vote. What we think is shake it up and make people rally people to this principle that we ought to be running the system respecting all votes equally. So we ran a crowd Funding Campaign to get this off the ground. We got people to rally to the principle. We found a way to talk about this. We see as americans we have a commitment to our republic that we have to deliver on and thats to make a president ial election system that possibly elects a person that could represent all of us. So i want to talk about how we get from 165 to 270. Maryland was the first state to embrace the exact in 2007. Interestingly since the election of donald trump and edward brought the Electoral College issue to the floor, there hasnt been an additional state added. If you look at the states, theyre essentially blue states. Interesting activity in red states, but the real question i would like to draw out on the panel is what is the state at play in really trying to get to 2070 270. From my perspective its three yards and a cloud of dust. It happens one state at a time. One legislature at a time. Yes, its right to point out there are 165 electoral votes in the exact already. Those 11 states are blue jurisdiction, but it happened in every one of those states in a bipartisan nonpartisan fashion. I think its also important to point out that in the lineup to the 2016 election, weve also passed one chamber or another in 12 additional states with 96 electoral votes. If anybody thinks thats easy, welcome to my shoes after this session. In 2016, in the lead up to the election we had republican response or ises and 163 democrat sponsors on the bills in the states introduced. This is a reform that enjoys the support of Newt Gingrich and howard dean. If you know, they dont get together on politics all that much, but they do believe the National Popular vote interstate exa compact is the way to go. We continue to make pressure over time work. I think its important to understand that the National Popular vote interstate compact was introduced in First Legislature. The idea germinated in 2005. Passed its First Legislature in 2007. And were 105 electoral votes away from it actually happening. Ten years later, it took the civil rights act, what, 30, 40 years to get done or the Voting Rights act. At the tenend of the day, a lot progress is sbg madebeing made. Look to the 12 states where we passed one chamber. The way to weigh in on this is in favor of the compact. You want to put that on the target. Put it on legislate action. Write your legislature. Tell him you support the compact. Ask him to sponsor the bill. Thats how you get this thing done. If you do the math, you cant do this just with blue state. Need purple and red states. Are there different arguments or different strategies that are needed and the related question, has the election of donald tr p trump. The great opportunity is in 2004, john kerry would have been elected president even though he lost the popular vote. If that had happened no doubt by 2008 we would have solved this problem. There would be no way to see this as a partisan issue. Its not a partisan issue. Even in the numbers. You made the observation. The data shows that in close elections, the probability is at least 33 that we will elect a minority president. Number one. Thats a motivation that i think we have got to do more to make people aware of. How can we run a democracy where onethird of the time we dont elect a majority the majority president. Number two. In 2016, its 99 the Campaign Spending in 14 states. They are older, they are wider. Their industry is 20th century industry. They deserve to be represented like any of us, but only as much as any of us. You couldnt design a system better set up for russian hacking than winner take all in Electoral College because the technique of figures out exactly what you got to flip is pretty trivial and its much harder when youre talking about the many votes. If we focus on the factual reasons why the Current System is bad, we should be able to bring more grassroots republicans along. Now, i imagine you felt this more than i would ever know. Grassroots republicans, i love. I was one once myself. Not anymore. Agree up. I used to be. And throughout the states theres an incredible number of really committed principal people pushing on both sides. I imagine from the top down, theres not much enthusiasm for this kind of reform. What we have to do is build this will outside of politics movement. Just doesnt allow them to play politics with this critical part of our democracy. And following up on what he said, making every vote counts thinks the key to this is education. We think that we dont want to just get 270 electoral votes. We want to build a Strong National bipartisan majority that supports a National Popular vote for president. We think w