The Electoral College was designed to balance the influence of populous states with that of smaller ones in presidential elections, as well as to balance the interests of the Framers between limiting congressional influence in the executive branch without instituting directly elected presidents. However, its relevance and fairness have come under scrutiny, prompting calls for reform. Advocates argue that the system undermines the principle of one-person, one-vote, while opponents contend it protects the interests of smaller states.

There are several different reform proposals. The most direct way would be to amend the Constitution and replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote. However, amending the Constitution is a very difficult process with a really high threshold. In addition, the polarization of modern America makes it nearly if not impossible that enough of a coalition could form to amend the Constitution. Since its institution, there have been more than seven hundred proposed amendments to modify or abolish the Electoral College. That is the highest number of amendments proposed on any one subject of constitutional reform.

Another possibility would be legislation, at the national or state level, that requires states to allocate their electors in a more proportional manner—getting rid of the current winner-take-all system. Like Maine and Nebraska, the votes of all citizens of a state would count. Or, at least, less votes would be “wasted” than are now.

One of the most promising current reform plans is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). The NPVIC is an agreement between states to award all of their electoral votes to the candidate who won the national popular vote, regardless of who won in their state. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have currently joined, but the NPVIC will not go into effect until enough states have joined that would determine the results of the Electoral College—states adding up to 270 electoral votes. This seems the likeliest avenue for reform, but it is not without issues. Because it is a voluntary compact, the NPVIC is not legally binding. States can leave at any time, and they might choose to do so if the national popular vote selects a candidate that they do not want to support with their electors. It is also useless until enough states join that puts it into effect.