After the presidential defeat, the popular vote movement is gaining ground in the states: NPR

An attempt to circumvent the electoral college is gaining ground in Mountain West.

Democrats in Colorado and New Mexico are moving forward with legislation to promise their 14 collective electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of who wins each state.

The plan will only come into force if the law is passed in states that represent an electoral majority. This threshold is 270 votes, the same number as that required to win the presidency.

Democrats were shocked by the fact that President Trump's victory marked the second time in five cycles that a democrat was losing the presidency while winning the popular vote. The year 2016 has been the most egregious example. Hillary Clinton won 3 million more votes than Donald Trump, but lost the election. It was the largest margin of all time for someone who won the popular vote, but lost the constituency.

Proponents of national popular vote measures argued that it was not political, but Republicans, who benefited from the electoral college system in the last election, do not agree.

And while a majority of the country has expressed support for giving the presidency to the person who wins the most votes – 55% in the Pew Research Center's latest poll – there are clear partisan differences. Three-quarters of Democrats support a change in the constitution, but less than a third of Republicans are.

So far, 11 states, including New York, California and New Jersey, have joined the effort, as has the District of Columbia, giving it 98 votes less than its goal .

Colorado looks set to become the 12th state. The state legislature passed the bill on Thursday, and Governor Jared Polis should sign it. In New Mexico, the bill is pending review by the state Senate after its approval by the House earlier this month.

If the bills are passed, it would show that the plan has gained momentum outside the coastal United States, especially in places where Democrats have full control of the state government.

John Koza designed the plan and chairs the organization behind him. Koza also co-invented the scratch lottery ticket and taught computer science at Stanford. However, he turned to the constituency after being frustrated by the "win-win-all" laws.

Koza said the rules are the reason why presidential candidates only campaign in a handful of states. He acknowledged what could be a potential loophole in the Constitution: if the constituency is inscribed in the Constitution, nothing says that a candidate who wins a state must get all his electoral votes.

"The political power to choose the president has been essentially attributed by the founders to the state legislatures," Koza said. "And over the years, they have passed various laws specifying the distribution of the electoral votes of their state."

In fact, Maine and Nebraska do not have a win-win-all system. They split their electoral votes among congressional congressional presidential candidates, with two additional votes for the state's winner.

Colorado State Senator Mike Foote, who sponsored the legislation, insisted that it was not a partisan response to Trump's victory in the US. 2016. Rather, he said, it is about defending the democratic principle of a person, a vote.

"It's time for every vote in the country to count equally," he said. "For now, if you live in a state that is not a battlefield, your vote will count less."

Bipartite calls did not go very far in Colorado. Not a single Republican voted for the bill while it was passing in the state legislature. During a debate in the House, a Republican even suggested renaming the bill "We really, really, really, really hate the Donald Trump Act of 2019."

Republican Senator Jerry Sonnenberg, who represents the plains east of Denver, worries about the consequences of a popular vote on rural America. He said it would lead candidates to campaign only in the largest media markets, such as New York and Los Angeles.

"You let us down nine [electoral] Of the 5.5 million people, all of a sudden, Colorado is irrelevant, "he said. It is important to ensure that presidential candidates understand that Colorado is important to the rest of the country. "

This partisan division is not limited to Colorado. Across the country, pollsters have seen a sharp drop in Republican support for a popular vote in the presidency since 2016. Koza, of the National Popular Vote, said it was much harder to get support his plan by the Republicans in recent years.

Although these opinions may change over time, this means that the compact will have little chance of succeeding in the short term. Only states with a democratic tendency have joined so far. Swing states, such as Ohio and Florida, have the least reason to sign up, which means that they probably need help from states of the United States. 39, a deep red.

There is also a broader question of whether it would be constitutional. The electoral college is clearly written in the founding document of the nation. Some insist that the Congress should approve it because it would revise the national election procedures. Other researchers have argued that states can not bind their constituents to voters outside their borders.

Koza insists that Article II gives states wide power to decide how they will choose their electoral delegates. Nevertheless, he expects a series of lawsuits if enough efforts of the national popular vote have been implemented.

Seth Masket, professor of political science at the University of Denver, said that these legal battles are still far away. In the short term, he sees this as a way to focus a familiar debate on the unique way in which the country chooses the president.

"It is saying that the status quo is unacceptable," he said. "This may not be the best way to change it, but it's at least a way to force some changes and force discussions about it."

Domenico Montanaro from NPR contributed to this report.