Don't circumvent the constitution: perhaps direct election of the president is a good idea. But trying to work around the Constitution isn't.

• Author: Samples, John
• Position: CON - Essay

In Federalist No. 10, James Madison identified our Constitution with "popular government." Power belongs to the people, but popular government does not mean unimpeded majority rule. Instead, the Founders sought to constitute the will of the people through institutions that restrained and refined the exercise of power.

Laws must gain the consent of three different constituencies: districts in the House, states in the Senate, and the nation with the president. The diversity of the states limits the centralizing urges of the national government. Amending the Constitution requires supermajorities in Congress and among the states.

The constitutional mode of presidential election represents this idea of popular government. The number of electors for each state reflects two kinds of equality, of states and of citizens. Smaller states thus have slightly more influence over choosing a president than they would under direct election. But they do not have a veto; large states still matter much more to presidential candidates.

The supporters of the National Popular Vote plan (NPV) wish to replace this method with direct election of the president. The Constitution allows such changes through the amendment process set out in Article V. The NPV plan does not propose to amend the Constitution.

Instead, it advocates that states agree to an interstate compact to cast their electoral votes for the winner of the popular vote. Once enough states signed up, a popular vote plurality would turn into a majority of electoral votes.

The NPV plan allows states with a majority of electors to amend the Constitution in practice if not in law. States with a majority of electors thus decide to circumvent the Constitution to enact an institutional innovation favoring the greater number of voters. Why should smaller states consent to such an abuse? A major change in American government should observe constitutional proprieties or it will not appear legitimate to those whose interests are harmed.

The popular vote plan would harm federalism. Once the states no longer matter in elections, they will matter less than they do now in the federal system. Americans will think of themselves less as a nation of states and more as a nation ruled by a plurality.

State legislators should represent the constituents who elected them. A representative who votes for the National Popular Vote plan transfers control over a state's electoral votes to voters outside the state. This advances the...