A MAJOR problem with the NPV [amongst a lot of others] is the fact that [IF it is ever enacted by a number of states totalling 270 electoral votes], utter chaos could ensue.
Consider this:
In a future election, let us assume that 15 states with a total of 270 votes participate in the NPV and that the OTHER 35 states DO NOT. FURTHERMORE, assume that the popular vote is EXTREMELY close with a differential of say 500,000 votes [maybe 1/2 of 1% of the total].
VALID QUESTIONS:
Could the “loser” demand a NATIONWIDE recount of votes since EACH AND EVERY one of the popular votes of the “winner” contributed to the awarding of the 270 electoral votes? Even the states that DO NOT participate in the NPV?
Could states with a 60+% popular vote [one way or the other] be forced to recount? AND, states CURRENTLY pay for their own recounts - would these states with WIDE MAJORITIES be forced to bear the expense?
AND, how do you ensure a UNIFORM recount? Chads vs. electronic vs. paper, etc.
THIS IS A FRIGGIN’ NIGHTMARE! It is an impractical attempt at an end-run around the Constitution and would be an UTTER DISASTER!
The possibility of recounts should not even be a consideration in debating the merits of a national popular vote. No one has ever suggested that the possibility of a recount constitutes a valid reason why state governors or U.S. Senators, for example, should not be elected by a popular vote.
The question of recounts comes to mind in connection with presidential elections only because the current system so frequently creates artificial crises and unnecessary disputes.
We do and would vote state by state. Each state manages its own election and is prepared to conduct a recount.
The state-by-state winner-take-all system is not a firewall, but instead causes unnecessary fires.
Given that there is a recount only once in about 160 statewide elections, and given there is a presidential election once every four years, one would expect a recount about once in 640 years with the National Popular Vote. The actual probability of a close national election would be even less than that because recounts are less likely with larger pools of votes.
The average change in the margin of victory as a result of a statewide recount was a mere 296 votes in a 10-year study of 2,884 elections.
No recount would have been warranted in any of the nation’s 56 previous presidential elections if the outcome had been based on the nationwide count.
In the current system, there are 51 separate opportunities for recounts in every presidential election. Recounts would be far less likely in a National Popular Vote system than in the current system. In the United States’ 56 total presidential elections, there have been 5 litigated state counts which were totally unnecessary and an artificial crisis created by the current state-by-state winner-take-all system. Based on U.S. election history, a national popular vote would reduce the probability of a recount to once in 640 years.