- After Democrats swept up the legislatures and governorships of five U.S. states in November, a rumor spread they were in a position to abolish the Electoral College — the group of 538 electors who can cast votes for U.S. president.
- While this system is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, it has allowed the election of five presidents who lost the popular vote (in 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016). Critics have panned the Electoral College as a form of minority rule that undermines democracy.
- The five states in question are Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It is true that, combined, they have enough electors to join and enact an agreement between states — a “compact” — to bypass the Electoral College, but not abolish it altogether.
- Instead, the states that joined the compact would grant their Electoral College votes to whichever candidate won the popular vote in a presidential election. In other words, the Electoral College would still exist, but it would defer to the result of the national vote.
- However, some experts say legal hurdles may stop this plan. The Compact Clause of the U.S. Constitution says Congress would have to approve the plan.
After Democrats swept up the legislatures and governorships of five U.S. states in the November midterm elections, a rumor spread they were now in a position to abolish the Electoral College — the group of 538 electors who cast votes for the U.S. president on behalf of their states.
Several social media posts made the claim, including on Instagram and X. One X post said “Dems now have the power to pass the National Voter Compact to effectively abolish the Electoral College” (archived):
Meanwhile, Snopes readers reached out, seeking to confirm the veracity of the rumor.
It is true that Democrats swept the legislatures and governorships of five states (Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin). It is also true that, combined, they have enough electors to join and enact an existing agreement between 18 states and Washington, D.C. — a “compact” — to bypass the Electoral College.
However, the compact would not abolish the Electoral College altogether. In addition, as we outline below, some experts say the move would require congressional approval.
We contacted the Democratic leadership of all five states and a constitutional law expert seeking more clarity. We will update this report should we receive responses.
The Electoral College
In the United States, voters do not elect the president directly. Instead, they vote for electors in each state who, for the most part, cast their ballots for the presidential candidate who wins a majority in that state (Maine and Nebraska cast two electoral votes to the statewide winner, then they allow each congressional district to cast its vote for that district’s winner). There are currently 538 electors in the Electoral College; presidents win with a simple majority of 270 electors.
This system has led to five instances where the elected president lost the national popular vote. For example in 2016, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, but her Republican opponent, Donald Trump, became president. In 2000, George W. Bush, a Republican, was elected despite earning fewer votes than Democrat Al Gore. The same thing happened in 1824, 1876 and 1888.
In practice, critics say, the Electoral College gives way to a minority rule — a system in which less-populated states have disproportionate political power. This, they argue, undermines democracy, which on principle allows the majority to decide.
There has long been a battle to restore balance by abolishing the Electoral College, which is enshrined in the 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This fact sets a high bar for abolition. Per Article 5, any change in the Constitution requires an amendment proposal by two-thirds of both chambers of Congress, which must then be ratified by three-quarters of the states.
Bypassing the Electoral College
How elections are run is the prerogative of each state. Nothing in federal law compels a state to give its electors’ votes to the statewide winner. This freedom has led to an effort, called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, that aims at electing the presidential winner of the nationwide popular vote while bypassing the constitutional amendment process.
An interstate compact is an agreement between two or more states. The states that joined the NPVIC agreed to give all their electors’ votes to the winner of the popular vote in a presidential election. Eighteen states and Washington, D.C. have joined the compact since its 2006 launch, for a total of 222 electors.
In order for the compact to become effective, the total number of electors for all of the states that adopt it must reach or surpass 270 — the simple majority. This, its supporters say, has become more likely now that Democrats have won both state houses and the governorship in five states during the 2026 midterms: Pennsylvania (19 Electoral College votes), Michigan (15 votes), Arizona (11 votes), Wisconsin (10 votes) and Nevada (6 votes). Should they adopt the NPVIC, these states would bring the total of electors above 270.
Legal challenges to the compact
But others say that even if the five states agree to join the compact, legal challenges lie ahead. One such challenge is that the compact may need Congress’ approval, University of Notre Dame Law Professor Derek Muller wrote in a 2023 blog post, citing two U.S. Supreme Court decisions. We reached out to Muller asking for more details.
It is true that the Compact Clause of the Constitution says states may not agree to anything without congressional approval (emphasis ours):
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
In other words, it is possible that these states may consider joining the NPVIC. However, the path to enacting it may not be straightforward.
For further reading, Snopes has covered several claims related to the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections, including a rumor that Trump is considering a nuclear strike on Iran.
