The Myth of the Bipartisan National Popular Vote Plan

*For legislative chambers, third-reading passage, unless otherwise indicated below. “Other” votes include excused absence, absence, abstention, “present”, presiding without voting, and not voting. Seat vacancies are excluded from totals.

^aA4225 was substituted for S2695 by voice vote before the Third Reading and final-passage vote in the Senate.

^bHB 1685, which passed the Illinois House on third reading on April 19, 2007, was a bill to permit junior high school students to be election judges. On May 31, 2007, the Senate passed an amendment to substitute a wholly unrelated bill joining the National Popular Vote compact, which passed. The January 2008 House vote was concurrence in the Senate amendment.

^cOver-ride of Governor Lingle’s veto fails when House adjourns.

^dOver-ride of Governor Lingle’s veto succeeds (required 2/3 vote in each chamber).

^eWashington House returned SB5628 to the Senate Rules Committee by resolution, March 13, 2008.

^fOn July 30, 2008, the Massachusetts Senate voted down a substitute amendment to H.4952, calling upon the US Congress to investigate “…whether the Electoral College should be abolished and replaced with a national popular vote through the passage of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States…” by 27 N to 9 Y, with 3 not voting. The original bill then passed under suspended rules without a roll call. However, July 31 was the final session day, and the Senate did not pass a vote, required under Massachusetts law, to transmit the bill to the Governor. (See http://www.mass.gov/legis/journal/185/sj073008.htm).

^gThe June 2 House roll call passed the bill to be engrossed. On July 20, 2012, the House enacted the bill, by a vote of 116-34 (D: 116-19-7, R: 0-15-0). The Senate July 15 roll call passed the bill to be engrossed, 28-10. It was enacted July 27, by a 28-9 vote.

^hThe D.C. council passed the bill on first reading in a vote as Committee of the Whole in July, then subsequently passed it by unanimous consent on September 21, 2010. The two “other” members were independents, and there were no Republican members of the council.

ⁱ“Other” members in the Vermont House in 2008 were 2 independents and 6 Progressives, 3 of whom won election with both Progressive and Democratic nominations and one of whom won election with Progressive, Democratic, and Republican nominations.

^j“Other” member in Vermont Senate in 2009 was a Progressive.

^kVermont’s House passed S.0031 on Third Reading on April 14, 2011, by 84-50, and then passed it in a final-passage vote on April 15, 2011 by 85-44. All switching between votes involved abstention on one or the other, with only one exception: Democrat Chip Conquest of Newbury voted Nay on Third Reading and Yea on final passage. “Other” members were 5 Progressives and 3 independents.

^lThird-reading passage. The Assembly later concurred in Senate Amendments, on August 30, 2006, by a nearly identical vote of 48-30. One Democrat, Hector De La Torre, missed the second vote, and one seat had, in the interim, become vacant when Republican John Harman won a special election to the state Senate in June 2006.

^mSenate concurring in House amendments. Original Third-Reading, Passage vote in Senate took place May 14, 2007, more than a year prior. That vote was 22-14-4. Between September 11, 2007 and May 29, 2008, the Assembly had the bill in the inactive file. All 7 switches involved abstention on one of the two votes.

ⁿVeto not over-ridden (no vote took place in either chamber).

^oConcurrence in House bill.

^pNo roll calls in House (Senate) despite passage in Senate (House).

^qDemocratic totals include 5 “Independent Democrats” and 1 “Democrat” who caucused with Republicans, plus 2 ex-Democrats expelled from the party’s caucus following indictment or arrest. All 8 voted for the bill.

^rSubstitution of Senate bill S3149a for House bill 4422a.

^sBills to remove expiration date (end of 2018) from 2014 law.

^tPass in concurrence, following defeat of amendment A LCO 5386, which would have substituted a congressional-district plan (as in use in Maine and Nebraska) for the NPV bill.

*Third-reading passage, unless otherwise indicated below. “Other” votes include excused absence, absence, abstention, “present”, presiding without voting, and not voting. Vacant seats are excluded from totals.

^aPassed House, not passed by Senate.

^bPassed Senate, not passed by House.

^cFailed to pass.

^d“Other” legislators were as follows: in the 2012 Louisiana House, independent members Jerome (Dee) Richard (elected in the 55th district over only Republican opposition in 2011, only Democratic opposition in 2007, and with no opposition in 2015) and Terry Brown (elected in the 22nd district over only Republican opposition in both 2011 and 2015); in the 2010 Maine House, yes-voting James J. Campbell (elected in the 138th district as a Republican in 2008, but later elected as an independent, over only a Republican opponent, in 2012 and 2014) and no-voting Tom Saviello (elected as a Democrat in 2002 and 2004, but un-enrolled from that party in 2005, and later elected to the Maine Senate as a Republican, in 2010, 2012, and 2014, before he again un-enrolled); in the 2014 Maine Senate, Richard Woodbury (elected over only Republican opposition in 2012); in the 2014 Maine House, Campbell again, now voting no, Joseph Brooks (elected over only Republican opposition in the 42nd district in 2012), Jeffrey Evangelos (elected over only Republican opposition in the 49th district in 2012), and Benjamin Chipman (elected over both a Republican and a Democrat in the 119th district in 2012).

^eThe Maine 2008 Senate and 2010 House roll calls were votes on accepting majority reports (“ought to pass”) from Legal and Veteran’s Affairs Committees. The 2008 Senate vote was preceded by two failed votes (both 17-17-1), first, to accept the majority report (ought to pass) and, second, to accept the minority report (ought not to pass) on March 10. Those ties were broken in April by one Republican (Hastings) who had been absent, voting no, but another (Mills) switching from supporting the minority and opposing the majority report (no-yes) to supporting the majority report (yes). All other senators voted consistently across the three roll calls.

^fThe Maine 2017 House roll call was a vote on accepting a minority committee report (“ought to pass”). When it failed, the majority report (“ought not to pass”) was subsequently accepted and sent to the Senate for concurrence. The Senate roll call was a vote to concur with the “ought not to pass” report.

^gThe 2019 roll calls on LD 816 (SP 252) in Maine were unusually complicated, with the Senate voting once in May and twice in June, and the House voting twice in May and five times in June. The unusual proliferation of votes reflected both inter-chamber conflict and uncertainty or wavering within the House caucuses.

^hSF 2227 was an omnibus state government finance bill that was amended in the House, but not the Senate, to include multiple changes to Minnesota election law. In addition to joining the NPV compact, the bill would have restored voting rights to former felons, established an independent redistricting commission, and allowed more cities to adopt ranked choice voting, among other provisions. A conference committee was discharged in May 2019.

ⁱIn the New Hampshire House, the bill to join the NPVIC was reported out of the Election Law committee as “inexpedient to legislate” (ITL). The roll call was a vote to adopt the committee’s report, so voting “yes” on the ITL motion amounted to opposing the NPV plan.